"For contractual reasons" would usually be read as meaning something along the lines of "we have agreed that we won't do that".Oh, are there any plans to include them in the future?
"For contractual reasons" would usually be read as meaning something along the lines of "we have agreed that we won't do that".Oh, are there any plans to include them in the future?
Ahh okay! Fair enough"For contractual reasons" would usually be read as meaning something along the lines of "we have agreed that we won't do that".
More a can't do because some people are funny about it still (despite them being in the public domain) ... there are still movements to make it open to all though. Once that happens........."For contractual reasons" would usually be read as meaning something along the lines of "we have agreed that we won't do that".
Haha, always the way with these things!More a can't do because some people are funny about it still (despite them being in the public domain)
Its all down to what is in the data. Some trains have associations, other don't.Hi, any particular reason why the inward working shows for LNER trains but not Avanti? The diagram is already publicly available according to the Platform numbers.
The 1S78 train in December should be forming off 1A39 from Manchester Piccadilly but it does not say explicitly.
Avanti services never seem to show this unless they are booked to terminate/start at Milton Keynes for example but not at London Euston. Thanks!
It's to do with the lack of association data for those Avanti workings. Generally Avanti don't do associations at Euston, I presume because the platform allocation is 'determinitive'.Hi, any particular reason why the inward working shows for LNER trains but not Avanti? The diagram is already publicly available according to the Platform numbers.
The 1S78 train in December should be forming off 1A39 from Manchester Piccadilly but it does not say explicitly.
Avanti services never seem to show this unless they are booked to terminate/start at Milton Keynes for example but not at London Euston. Thanks!
I suppose it would be that they're more likely to be swapped around on the fly whereas LNER have different sets (eg 800, 801, IC225) so generally stick to their diagrams.It's to do with the lack of association data for those Avanti workings. Generally Avanti don't do associations at Euston, I presume because the platform allocation is 'determinitive'.
It is entirely at the TOC's discretion. There's never been any notice given to the public when any of the previous TOCs started providing data, so the best indication that SN or TL or SE have joined the scheme is when their allocations start appearing.Will Southern Thameslink or any other SouthEast operator join KnowYourTrain or Are they not aware of the site's existence or Aren't willing to sign any license agreement?
Or is it even up to the TOC or does RTT decide for themselves whether they should add it?
Yes, Avanti often exercise the freedom to reallocate units at Euston on short notice.I suppose it would be that they're more likely to be swapped around on the fly whereas LNER have different sets (eg 800, 801, IC225) so generally stick to their diagrams.
This is also the case with TfW and GWR, which is a really nice touch!RTT now looks to be showing set numbers as well as the loco - for example:
Realtime Trains | 1A26 1105 Leeds to London Kings Cross | 18/09/2022
Real-time train running information for 1A26 1105 departure from Leeds to London Kings Cross on 18/09/2022. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.www.realtimetrains.co.uk
RTT now looks to be showing set numbers as well as the loco - for example:
Realtime Trains | 1A26 1105 Leeds to London Kings Cross | 18/09/2022
Real-time train running information for 1A26 1105 departure from Leeds to London Kings Cross on 18/09/2022. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.www.realtimetrains.co.uk
I've also noticed this - very helpful, isn't it!This is also the case with TfW and GWR, which is a really nice touch!
RTT now looks to be showing set numbers as well as the loco
Ooh, very exciting! And ScotRail HSTs are covered as well.This is also the case with TfW and GWR, which is a really nice touch!
Fair point, but "Q" passenger workings are vanishingly rare.It would be nice if passenger services that run as required could be marked somehow in the simple view. None of the platform 2 trains in these screenshots are running today, but unless detailed view is selected there is no warning that the train only runs if required.
great, isn't it! I won't need to make as many requests to the non-urgent TOPS thread now...add TPE MK5a sets and XC HSTs to that list!
Yes - it caught me out today! Vanishingly rare and excruciatingly annoying!Fair point, but "Q" passenger workings are vanishingly rare.
Along with Grand Central and Hull Trains.Chiltern has now been added and will show unit numbers
Excellent that will be really useful!Chiltern has now been added and will show unit numbers
Chiltern has now been added and will show unit numbers
Likewise. I only need 5 of them (one of them being the Hydrogen one) so it does result in a number of wasted efforts.Yeehaa! That is going to make my 165/0 hunting so much easier, no more wasted trips to Chiltern land Thanks for the update!
Likewise. I only need 5 of them (one of them being the Hydrogen one) so it does result in a number of wasted efforts.
I was pondering some kind of rover for later this month - may be a Heart of England now!Nice, my wants are somewhat more than that as you can see below, with a copy-paste directly from my mainline wants list:
165003/007/011/015/017/022/023/025/
034/036/037/039
I am rarely on territory covered by 165s, to be fair, and there is always something more exciting to do. Still, it looks rather likely I will be factoring in a visit to the Chilterns in the near future now, I shall have to ensure it is done around peak time to maximise scores. Something to research during the rancid weather on Wednesday!