Should passenger trains be identified to the public by their train numbers?

[daodao]

In the closed thread https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...e-but-i-feel-that-i-did-not-commit-it.242505/ , @urbophile made the following comment:

In other countries, a train is identified by a train number and not the departure time. If that had been the case here, there would be less cause to dispute. Though it would still be easy to miss seeing it if boarding in a hurry.

Should passenger trains be identified to the public by their train numbers (and not just their origin/departure time) in the public timetable and elsewhere, including on advance purchase tickets restricted to specific trains? This might cause less confusion when trains are running late, and reduce the likelihood of passengers inadvertently boarding the wrong train, with financial penalties and worse if they hold an advance or restricted ticket. Comments/votes welcome.

 

[zwk500]

Intercity/Regional trains yes. My basic criteria would be on services you can reserve seats on. I'd also at the same time adjust advances so that they're not linked to specific trains unless counted places or reservations are available. If you can't reserve a space then it should be done with route numbers, takt-style.

It's worth clarifying that Headcodes are NOT the solution to this - the Retail ID is what you want.

 

[Gloster]

I think that in most countries train numbers are not duplicated anywhere on the network or at least nowhere in the vicinity of another train using the number. As I understand it, that is not the situation here: it certainly wasn’t in my day and I suspect it still exists, probably to a greater extent.

 

[zwk500]

I think that in most countries train numbers are not duplicated anywhere on the network or at least nowhere in the vicinity of another train using the number. As I understand it, that is not the situation here: it certainly wasn’t in my day and I suspect it still exists, probably to a greater extent.

Headcodes need not be the Public train Number.

 

[CE142]

Yes! It works well abroad, you need train C1234 to get to were you are going sir. Perhaps we could also have Wagonstande' (sp?) on the platforms as well, showing the train numbers and formations!

 

[Bletchleyite]

For IC trains, flight numbers.

For regional trains, bus liks route numbers e.g. LM2 to Birmingham.

 

[stuu]

Yes. What possible harm could a bit more information do?

 

[SargeNpton]

When the 6-character Retail Service ID (RSID) was set up for the reservations system it was intended that it would be used in public facing systems to show to the passenger that the RSID on their reservation coupon was the same train shown on the timetable poster and on the departure screens. It would then also be used on the bodyside displays on the trains themselves (Pendolinos and Voyagers have this ability).

However, that concept of using the RSID to identify a train to the public has been largely ignored ever since.

 

[jfollows]

It's additional information, it does no harm, with the caveat that it needs to be the Retail Service ID (or something else) and not the headcode, as others have already said.
If the people who run the trains want to enforce their rules on advance tickets and avoid the nonsense reported in https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...e-but-i-feel-that-i-did-not-commit-it.242505/ then they need to make it clearer which train is which. Yesterday I walked onto a platform just as a train was running in; in my case I had an open ticket so it's not really relevant but if someone had told me that I wasn't on the 16:13 to London but the 15:13 running late without other warning and I was then told my ticket wasn't valid I'd have been annoyed to say the least. If at least I was given a number to verify my train which was clearly displayed on the train and on the departure board before I boarded it could make sense.

 

[popeter45]

For IC trains, flight numbers.

For regional trains, bus liks route numbers e.g. LM2 to Birmingham.

Issue there is how some service act as both intercity as well as regional, e.g. all the local stops GWR trains make in cornwall

 

[Iskra]

I think it's just something that would cause additional confusion and unnecessary complexity for many. Passengers can struggle enough as it is with simple stuff like finding the right platform, even when they're already on it. It might be needed more abroad where train carriages aren't always clearly labelled with their destinations like they are in the UK.

 

[zwk500]

Issue there is how some service act as both intercity as well as regional, e.g. all the local stops GWR trains make in cornwall

If reservations are available on the train, it uses a train number. Even if people use it for local hops (e.g. Doncaster-York).

 

[tbtc]

Individual numbers for every service would get complicated given the thousands of services each week

The problem with the numbers is always going to be the complexity of services and how you represent that

For example, Nottingham to Leeds is every hour, so you have a route number for that… but then some trains stop additional at smaller intermediate stations like Normanton, so do they get a separate number? And the ones that go the “Old Road” and omit Dronfield, would they be another number? With another number for services that run via Derby instead of the Erewash? And then more additional numbers for combinations of the above (e.g. Via Derby AND the Old Road… via Derby and Dronfield but an additional stop at Normanton?). Do part route services (e.g. Nottingham to Sheffield) need a separate number to alert passengers to the fact that they don’t go all the way? Some bus companies have done this on their routes.

There’s a few routes where the daytime debate is sufficient to sustain a short distance stopper to permit the longer distance service to be speeded up… but the evening/Sunday trips are one combined train

And then what about routes where you can get multiple types of train, do you have a separate number to distinguish the services with first class?

Or late night trains that omit some intermediate stations in case of engineering works?

Or the rare services that are effectively two routes joined together, like the daily Gloucester - Birmingham - Stansted? Does that need a unique number? Or do we cut established through services because they are too messy for a simple route map? Where do you draw the line?

 

[zwk500]

Individual numbers for every service would get complicated given the thousands of services each week

A date suffices for individual days.

For example, Nottingham to Leeds is every hour, so you have a route number for that… but then some trains stop additional at smaller intermediate stations like Normanton, so do they get a separate number? And the ones that go the “Old Road” and omit Dronfield, would they be another number? With another number for services that run via Derby instead of the Erewash? And then more additional numbers for combinations of the above (e.g. Via Derby AND the Old Road… via Derby and Dronfield but an additional stop at Normanton?). Do part route services (e.g. Nottingham to Sheffield) need a separate number to alert passengers to the fact that they don’t go all the way? Some bus companies have done this on their routes.

You simplify the timetable to a takt pattern as part of the route numbers. Routes with skips can have suffices (E.g. S7a/S7b)

And then what about routes where you can get multiple types of train, do you have a separate number to distinguish the services with first class?

You could have patterns to it, or you just use the systems to manage it so that train 1045 has first class but train 1056 doesn't.

Or late night trains that omit some intermediate stations in case of engineering works?

Again, train 9014 calls at Stations A, B, C, trains 9056 calls at station C only.

Or the rare services that are effectively two routes joined together, like the daily Gloucester - Birmingham - Stansted? Does that need a unique number? Or do we cut established through services because they are too messy for a simple route map? Where do you draw the line?

Could either have an 'out of pattern' number, or operate under 2 different train numbers and the journey planners amended to show it's the same unit through.

 

[Turtle]

In the closed thread https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...e-but-i-feel-that-i-did-not-commit-it.242505/ , @urbophile made the following comment:



Should passenger trains be identified to the public by their train numbers (and not just their origin/departure time) in the public timetable and elsewhere, including on advance purchase tickets restricted to specific trains? This might cause less confusion when trains are running late, and reduce the likelihood of passengers inadvertently boarding the wrong train, with financial penalties and worse if they hold an advance or restricted ticket. Comments/votes welcome.

Yes, theoretically that would help. In practice, though, how many people rushing for a train would stop to scrutinise the train number. Not so important a decision on European railways which do not have umpteen thousand different fares.

 

[tbtc]

You simplify the timetable to a takt pattern as part of the route numbers. Routes with skips can have suffices (E.g. S7a/S7b)

But we don’t have the nice simple “Takt” so beloved of many on here

Even what looks like a simple hourly clockface service (the Nottingham - Leeds I’d mentioned above) has a variety of different services/ calls in reality

So you end up with passengers for somewhere like Dronfield having to remember that they can take a 57 or 57b or 57c or 57e but not a 57a or a 57d… and that’s meant to make things simpler?

Like a lot of these threads that mention “Takt”, it all sounds good if you were designing a rail network from scratch… but trying to impose it onto our messy railway would be a lot harder

It’s different with buses, e.g. every service serves every stop so there’s no variations of stopping patterns or services diverted each week to maintain the “route knowledge” of staff or in case of engineering work.

There’s similarly no problem with buses where my ticket (and seat booking) are for the 17:05 and not the 17:20, the only time the time comes into it is in the question “Am I Too Early” to use an OAP pass

You could have patterns to it, or you just use the systems to manage it so that train 1045 has first class but train 1056 doesn't.

Again, train 9014 calls at Stations A, B, C, trains 9056 calls at station C only

I think that your points here relate to every individual service having a unique number

 

[Falcon1200]

Intercity/Regional trains yes. My basic criteria would be on services you can reserve seats on.

I agree; Beneficial for longer distance trains but unnecessary for stopping and suburban services.

It's worth clarifying that Headcodes are NOT the solution to this

I disagree! Why not use the headcode, it's just a series of numbers and a letter, and it would save staff in both operational and commercial roles, ie mainly Guards, having to use a different form depending who they were talking to.

 

[zwk500]

I disagree! Why not use the headcode, it's just a series of numbers and a letter, and it would save staff in both operational and commercial roles, ie mainly Guards, having to use a different form depending who they were talking to.

Because Headcodes are repeated several times across the country and during the day on the same route. It's become a much bigger problem recently as the checking to prevent identical TIDs being too close together has slipped, as has the minimum time allowed by the standards.
Also for services that would use route numbers rather than train numbers, you will still need a way to identify individual services for operational reasons, as well as a system that includes non-revenue moves and freight services. The squeeze on Headcodes is resolvable if you reserve train numbers for passenger services only.

 

[Falcon1200]

Because Headcodes are repeated several times across the country and during the day on the same route.

Yes, but mostly if not entirely for repetitive services, not long distance expresses; Duplication in the same area at the same time would have serious safety implications!

 

[zwk500]

Yes, but mostly if not entirely for repetitive services, not long distance expresses; Duplication in the same area at the same time would have serious safety implications!

And yet it does happen. Particularly when STP plans are in.

 

[Esker-pades]

Because Headcodes are repeated several times across the country and during the day on the same route.

The 6-character headcodes can't be.

 

[zwk500]

The 6-character headcodes can't be.

The 6-Charachter headcodes don't go downstream. TRUST can only handle 4-charachters, same as the Train Describer system.

 

[Esker-pades]

The 6-Charachter headcodes don't go downstream. TRUST can only handle 4-charachters, same as the Train Describer system.

Surely there'd be a way to adapt such that all six went to the booking systems.

(Or perhaps not; we don't like change)

 

[zwk500]

Surely there'd be a way to adapt such that all six went to the booking systems.

(Or perhaps not; we don't like change)

I don't see why 6-Character headcodes are better than the 4-digit Retail IDs the industry is already using. The RSIDs are all in TPS, they get sent out to the systems that need them now. No need to adapt anything or change any legacy systems.

 

[Bevan Price]

It's additional information, it does no harm, with the caveat that it needs to be the Retail Service ID (or something else) and not the headcode, as others have already said.
If the people who run the trains want to enforce their rules on advance tickets and avoid the nonsense reported in https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...e-but-i-feel-that-i-did-not-commit-it.242505/ then they need to make it clearer which train is which. Yesterday I walked onto a platform just as a train was running in; in my case I had an open ticket so it's not really relevant but if someone had told me that I wasn't on the 16:13 to London but the 15:13 running late without other warning and I was then told my ticket wasn't valid I'd have been annoyed to say the least. If at least I was given a number to verify my train which was clearly displayed on the train and on the departure board before I boarded it could make sense.

One solution to that sort of situation is that it should be made illegal to penalise passengers for making a mistake if they board a very late train.

 

[D6130]

Wagonstande' (sp?)

'Wagenstandanzeiger'.

 

[M&NEJ]

'Wagenstandanzeiger'.

Glad to see we have a polyglot on here! Going back to CE142's earlier point, I think they're a great help on the continent. But I don't think Euston could handle them though, as they tend to imply some sort of commitment as to which platform a train is going to use!

 

[zwk500]

Glad to see we have a polyglot on here! Going back to CE142's earlier point, I think they're a great help on the continent. But I don't think Euston could handle them though, as they tend to imply some sort of commitment as to which platform a train is going to use!

There's nothing to say a train number involves advertising the platform number earlier.

 

[M&NEJ]

There's nothing to say a train number involves advertising the platform number earlier.

I had gone off topic on a tangent that arose upthread; so I was referring to the continental practice of showing train compositions at a "wagenstandanzeiger" placed on individual platforms. I wasn't referring to headcodes or similar.

 

[Tester]

Absolutely not, because virtually every other country does so