stevetay3
Member
The routeing guide the biggest joke of all. eg. Passengers travelling from stations on the Greenford branch or Ealing broadway may travel via Slough, unless I am missing something what other way is there, Paddington not allowed.
This isn't really anything to do with the Routeing Guide itself.The routeing guide the biggest joke of all. eg. Passengers travelling from stations on the Greenford branch or Ealing broadway may travel via Slough, unless I am missing something what other way is there, Paddington not allowed.
Yes but there are loads of them are they paying people good money to state the obvious in this publication, I have read all of it and I can’t completely fathom in out. The money would be much better spent on improving the service rather than “I can travel via slough when I am going Ealing to Reading.“ It’s time the railway moved out of the last century.This isn't really anything to do with the Routeing Guide itself.
You are quoting an easement; as documented on this forum on previous occasions, easements are encoded for a variety of reasons, one of which is to resolve issues in journey planners. The text version of the easement shouldn't be taken out of context and you cannot read too much into the meaning of any such text.
Fortunately we don't have to understand the routing guide as those who create and maintain journey planners do it for us.Yes but there are loads of them are they paying people good money to state the obvious in this publication, I have read all of it and I can’t completely fathom in out. The money would be much better spent on improving the service rather than “I can travel via slough when I am going Ealing to Reading.“ It’s time the railway moved out of the last century.
Isn't that trying to say or instruct computer software that when someone buys a ticket at Ealing to travel to Reading, it's neessary to take a direct train? In other words heading in the wrong direction to Paddington and going to Reading non-stop isn't allowed on the usual ticket.“I can travel via slough when I am going Ealing to Reading.“
But it is most likely quicker via PaddingtonIsn't that trying to say or instruct computer software that when someone buys a ticket at Ealing to travel to Reading, it's neessary to take a direct train? In other words heading in the wrong direction to Paddington and going to Reading non-stop isn't allowed on the usual ticket.
Quicker journey = more expensive fare. Passengers have the choice.But it is most likely quicker via Paddington
...and therefore appropriate to be charged at a higher price for the longer distance and higher perceived value.But it is most likely quicker via Paddington
No.Isn't that trying to say or instruct computer software that when someone buys a ticket at Ealing to travel to Reading, it's neessary to take a direct train? In other words heading in the wrong direction to Paddington and going to Reading non-stop isn't allowed on the usual ticket.
030012,Journeys to or from SOuth Greenford, Castle Bar Park, Drayton Green, Hanwell, Acton Mainline, Ealing Broadway, West Ealing, Hayes and Harlington and West Drayton to Reading and beyond may travel via Slough. This easement applies in both directions
E,030012,19042005,31122999,030012,3,1,3,YYYYYYY,,
E,030013,19042005,31122999,030012,3,1,3,YYYYYYY,,
All stations listed above (by CRS code) are origins, except:L,030012,AML,2
L,030012,CBP,2
L,030012,DRG,2
L,030012,EAL,2
L,030012,HAN,2
L,030012,HAY,2
L,030012,RDG,4
L,030012,SGN,2
L,030012,SLO,1
L,030012,STL,2
L,030012,WDT,2
L,030012,WEA,2
In the eastbound direction, this is reversed, i.e. all the origins are specified as destinations.L,030013,AML,3
L,030013,CBP,3
L,030013,DRG,3
L,030013,EAL,3
L,030013,HAN,3
L,030013,HAY,3
L,030013,RDG,4
L,030013,SGN,3
L,030013,SLO,1
L,030013,STL,3
L,030013,WDT,3
L,030013,WEA,3
True in many cases, though not for shorter distancesQuicker journey = more expensive fare. Passengers have the choice.
That is not the purpose, no.Yes but there are loads of them are they paying people good money to state the obvious in this publication
There is no need for anyone to fathom it out, unless they have a job working with rail fares.I have read all of it and I can’t completely fathom in out.
Easements are implemented for variety of reasons, such as to fix data issues, or to fix journey planners that incorrectly interpret the routeing guide.The money would be much better spent on improving the service rather than “I can travel via slough when I am going Ealing to Reading.“ It’s time the railway moved out of the last century.
Could you please tell me what all the above is supposed to mean to the average punter we don’t all have degrees in itNo.
Here is an analysis of the easement:
Text:
Easement Record data (one record for each direction):
Start date: 19-April-2005
Easement type: Normal
Easement class: Positive
Easement category: Routeing Point Easement
Location Record data (two sets, covering each direction, first we cover westbound):
All stations listed above (by CRS code) are origins, except:
RDG (Reading) is the via point
SLO (Slough) is the Applicable location
In the eastbound direction, this is reversed, i.e. all the origins are specified as destinations.
All this actually means is that where the conditions are met, Slough is a valid Routeing Point.
The text could be better worded, but the text is ignored by journey planning software and there is no requirement for any customer to be aware of it.
True in many cases, though not for shorter distances
For example Greenford to Didcot has the choice of "Not via London" or "+Any Permitted", while Ealing Broadway to Reading only has "Not via London"
That is not the purpose, no.
There is no need for anyone to fathom it out, unless they have a job working with rail fares.
Easements are implemented for variety of reasons, such as to fix data issues, or to fix journey planners that incorrectly interpret the routeing guide.
Now, if your criticism were that the way the text is worded is not always clear, and does not always relate to what the easement is actually doing, then that would be a valid criticism.
Why does anyone realistically need to go via Paddington to get from Ealing to Reading? The 'average punter' certainly wouldn't.It is far more expensive via Paddington, it is not the passengers fault there are no direct fast trains on there route, you would need Ealing to Pad. To singles at 3.40.then Pad to Reading 50.20 anytime day return. Ealing to Reading direct 30.20 anytime day return. a difference of 27 more just to go Ealing to Paddington, surely a positive easement should apply to stop this massive difference in price would be called profiteering elsware.
Could you please tell me what all the above is supposed to mean to the average punter we don’t all have degrees in it
It's 40 minutes on a direct train, twice an hour.It is far more expensive via Paddington, it is not the passengers fault there are no direct fast trains on there route, you would need Ealing to Pad. To singles at 3.40.then Pad to Reading 50.20 anytime day return.
I'd argue there should be +via London fares for Ealing to Reading, to bring it in line with longer distance journeys. However this has nothing to do with easements.Ealing to Reading direct 30.20 anytime day return. a difference of 27 more just to go Ealing to Paddington, surely a positive easement should apply to stop this massive difference in price would be called profiteering elsware.
As stated above, it's a set of data to make journey planners work. The average punter does not need to understand the data.Could you please tell me what all the above is supposed to mean to the average punter we don’t all have degrees in it
Why does anyone realistically need to go via Paddington to get from Ealing to Reading? The 'average punter' certainly wouldn't.
Besides, if you can find a mainline service running from platform 10, you can use Contactless.
Indeed, but the point is that with platforms 10, 11, 12 and 14 being inside one gateline a journey from Ealing Broadway to Reading with the fast train departing platform 10 doesn't involve passing any barriers whereas arriving from Ealing Broadway on those platforms and going to Reading via platforms 2 to 5 involves a touch out and in at Paddington.Contactless is valid from any platform at Paddington (although the platform 6&7 readers may give strange results)
Maybe it's a hangover when the one train a day went to high Wycombe. While such an easement may not be beneficial for people going Reading. It maybe because journey planners got confused for locations such as Oxford.The routeing guide the biggest joke of all. eg. Passengers travelling from stations on the Greenford branch or Ealing broadway may travel via Slough, unless I am missing something what other way is there, Paddington not allowed.
When travelling on PAYG you can take any route you like - the Routeing Guide doesn't apply. The only provisos are:Are people saying go contactless via Paddington without touching in at Paddington. Is this even allowed?
All seams a bit dodgy to me, if there were an easement non of this would matter.When travelling on PAYG you can take any route you like - the Routeing Guide doesn't apply. The only provisos are:
On the last point, TfL doesn't actually publish what these are for the contactless-only extensions to Reading, Luton Airport Parkway etc. So I think they would find it difficult to justify imposing any maximum fares where they haven't even given you an opportunity to know what the maximum time is!
- You must remain within the PAYG validity area at all times
- You must touch in and out, and at any intermediate barriers you pass
- You must remain within the maximum journey times
In this particular instance, if you touched out at one NR barrier line and back in at another at Paddington, I suspect you would be charged for two separate journeys, Ealing to Paddington and Paddington to Reading. But if you touched out at the LU barrier line and then in at the NR barrier line, I think you would be charged the much lower Ealing to Reading fare, where there is only one (default) route, because the OSI would join up the two journeys into one. There is no such OSI for NR to NR as far as I know.
How is any of it dodgy? You are allowed to take any route you like when taking PAYG. You might be charged more for certain routes or journeys than others, but that's the corollary of that flexibility.All seams a bit dodgy to me, if there were an easement non of this would matter.
It is certainly an interesting question. There is only one published route from Ealing Broadway to Reading but it is quite possible for there to be unpublished fares in the Contactless system to cover 'unusual' journeys.But if you touched out at the LU barrier line and then in at the NR barrier line, I think you would be charged the much lower Ealing to Reading fare, where there is only one (default) route, because the OSI would join up the two journeys into one. There is no such OSI for NR to NR as far as I know.
Are you sure? The contactless system isn't like Oyster; charges are determined by the back-office systems so it is perfectly possible for journeys to cost less if you extend them through an OSI. Oyster can't do the same thing because charges are determined at a local level (though I understand the back-office capping may now fix this, albeit retrospectively).In the Reading to Ealing direction, there will clearly be a minimum charge of the Reading to Paddington fare for touching out on the barriers at Paddington before doing anything else.
To be honest I hadn't considered whether that might be the case because I would usually aim to avoid making such a journey based on the belief that it would be set up to charge the higher fare.Are you sure? The contactless system isn't like Oyster; charges are determined by the back-office systems so it is perfectly possible for journeys to cost less if you extend them through an OSI. Oyster can't do the same thing because charges are determined at a local level (though I understand the back-office capping may now fix this, albeit retrospectively).
There is only one published route from Ealing Broadway to Reading but it is quite possible for there to be unpublished fares in the Contactless system to cover 'unusual' journeys.
I think there.may be an osi between the national rail platforms (except platform 6-7) this is because OSIs aren't smart they are just set to be a set of gatelines that will set up a through journey to each other they can't tell if you change mode or going back the same way.
This is just a problem of the railway being in a period of transition whereby a new operator has introduced services on the Reading to Paddington route and it has a different fare structure, which some see as highly simplified, charged solely on a point to point basis, but the old fares still exist alongside.This is all meaninglessness to the average passenger, three or six different fares for the same journey via Slough, Paddington or direct with ticket, oyster or contactless. Why is the public not better informed about all this, I can now see why people can end up with a criminal record just for getting on the wrong liveried train.
Could someone please explain NR-NR OSI at Paddington please.
You touch IN at your origin and OUT at your destination.Are people saying go contactless via Paddington without touching in at Paddington. Is this even allowed?
Routeing Guide easements are not applicable to Contactless/Oyster PAYG; it's a separate system.All seams a bit dodgy to me, if there were an easement non of this would matter.