Why times and not train numbers in UK?

[kristiang85]

Sorry if this has been covered before but I can't find anything on the search.

Why is the UK different from pretty much any other country I've been to in that trains are known by their time, rather than the number of the service? e.g. on my commute, the 0650 from Portsmouth, the 0816 from Basingstoke, the 0834 from Woking are all the same train, and its not known as the designation of 1T22.

Its something I've always wondered, as it is open to so much confusion, especially on busy lines and where delays are rife (and people not used to travelling the railways with specific trains on their ticket could easily get on the wrong one in such instances).

 

[plarailfan]

A headcode can be used for more than one train and if a passenger had a ticket designated for (1T22) which was then cancelled after the ticket was sold, it might cause unnecessary anxiety, worry and concern to passengers.
The present system, while not perfect, has worked reasonably well, over a long period of time.

 

[mpthomson]

Because the general public have no idea (and there's no reason why they should have) what IT22 actually means. They do know what the 10.02 to Paddington means, however.

 

[DarloRich]

Because the general public have no idea (and there's no reason why they should have) what IT22 actually means. They do know what the 10.02 to Paddington means, however.

is the correct answer!

 

[AlterEgo]

This is one of the few times that "it's always been done that way" is the right answer!

 

[ainsworth74]

Though of course whilst headcodes may be reused the same is not true of Retail Service IDs and indeed their format would probably be quite familiar to people who fly as they appear not dissimilar to flight numbers and could help avoid confusion. For instance GR5240 refers to the 0830 LNER service from Edinburgh to London whilst TP5117 refers to the 1002 TPE service from Newcastle to Manchester. Very similar to the way flights are ID'd, for example LH9348 refers to a Lufthansa flight from Heathrow to Chicago leaving at 1035.

I do think that giving Retail ID's more prominence could help passengers identify services particularly at busy stations or where the timetable means you can have two trains very close together operated by the same company. For example from Darlington southbound you often have one CrossCountry service leaving at around xx07 and another at xx12 both from the same platform. It only takes a little bit of disruption for the the xx07 to arrive around the time the xx12 is due. However if the Retail ID was more prominent then a passenger for the xx12 would have a ticket saying "Valid only on the xx12 XC1234 Darlington to Birmingham" which would help clue them into identifying that the train in the platform is actually the xx07 and not their train.

I don't think we should replace times with Retail ID's (as already mentioned it's been used since the year dot and is familiar and also works) but equally I do think they could be useful in providing more information that is clear, easy to understand and won't involve overloading the passenger. It's not as if announcements would get severely cluttered and neither would tickets/screens by adding the information for instance: "The next train from Platform 1 will be the 1112 XC1630 CrossCountry service to Plymouth calling at...".

Just because we've always done something one way doesn't mean we shouldn't think tweaking it

 

[Warwick]

Not headcodes, individual train numbers. I don't know headcodes from my local station (Penzance) but let us suppose that the hypothetical 08.30, 09.30 and 10.30 departures are headcode numbered 1J05, 1J07 and 1J09. For commercial purposes they could simply be something like 11105, 11107 and 11109. You get the idea? Five digits so people don't get confused with a time display as well as giving 99,999 combinations per day.

 

[cactustwirly]

But I think the OP is asking about the train numbers like on the continent?
Like in Austria R1234, REx1234, RJ123, EC12 etc.
Each train has a number on the timetable, the letters correspond to the type of service.
The train numbers are displayed on the PIS along with the destination, departure time and principal stops.

It does make a lot of sense, especially at the larger stations with departures close together, like London Liverpool Street for example.

 

[LowLevel]

There was an attempt in the 2000s to make more use of them (4 digit retail service ID) but it didn't really take off. 22x and 390s display them on the outside of the carriage.

 

[Esker-pades]

There was an attempt in the 2000s to make more use of them (4 digit retail service ID) but it didn't really take off. 22x and 390s display them on the outside of the carriage.

As do the 345s.

 

[Mag_seven]

I would like to see the European train numbering system adopted in this country but in the poisonous post Brexit atmosphere I can't see it happening.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Not headcodes, individual train numbers. I don't know headcodes from my local station (Penzance) but let us suppose that the hypothetical 08.30, 09.30 and 10.30 departures are headcode numbered 1J05, 1J07 and 1J09. For commercial purposes they could simply be something like 11105, 11107 and 11109. You get the idea? Five digits so people don't get confused with a time display as well as giving 99,999 combinations per day.

Can you explain how announcing train 11105 to London Paddington is easier for a passenger to understand than announcing the 08:30 to London Paddington because I’m really struggling.

 

[pemma]

e.g. on my commute, the 0650 from Portsmouth, the 0816 from Basingstoke, the 0834 from Woking are all the same train, and its not known as the designation of 1T22.

Its something I've always wondered, as it is open to so much confusion, especially on busy lines and where delays are rife (and people not used to travelling the railways with specific trains on their ticket could easily get on the wrong one in such instances).

What happens if for some reason the service from Portsmouth is cancelled but later gets reinstated under a new headcode from Basingstoke only?

 

[Bletchleyite]

There was an attempt in the 2000s to make more use of them (4 digit retail service ID) but it didn't really take off. 22x and 390s display them on the outside of the carriage.

390s haven't for ages, they display VT then the headcode/reporting number e.g. VT1A11.

Personally I think we should start displaying the unique Retail Service ID (which does exist for every train; you can see them on RTT) more widely.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What happens if for some reason the service from Portsmouth is cancelled but later gets reinstated under a new headcode from Basingstoke only?

That's why there is a separate Retail Service ID which should be used.

 

[Warwick]

Can you explain how announcing train 11105 to London Paddington is easier for a passenger to understand than announcing the 08:30 to London Paddington because I’m really struggling.

I'm not suggesting announcing it, just printing it on the ticket and displaying it on the train. Mind you, when I went on Eurostar to gay Paree a couple of years ago the train time and number was announced at boarding time. I seem to remember it went something like, "Train nine oh one eight, the ten twenty three for Paris is now boarding".

 

[DaiGog]

Also, if a train is cancelled and is advertised as such on a TOC website or on social media, it is often referred to as (for example) the 12:30 Edinburgh - London Kings Cross. If I have an AP ticket from Doncaster, that isn't a great deal of use to me. Knowing that train LN2364 had been cancelled would be useful, as the ID number would be on my booking confirmation.

DB announces that the train now approaching platform 7 will be ICE587 to Hamburg Hauptbahnhof via Hannover, for example, and the train IDs are displayed on information screens alongside the departure time.

 

[DenmarkRail]

I agree we should move to a train number type thing, but not headcodes... For example:
Virgin Trains: VT (then number)
Great Western: GW
LNWR: LN
etc etc...

 

[Bertie the bus]

I'm not suggesting announcing it, just printing it on the ticket and displaying it on the train.

An utterly pointless excercise then unless you think passengers stare at approaching trains.

This entire thread is 'they do it abroad so they should do it here'.

 

[ainsworth74]

I agree we should move to a train number type thing, but not headcodes... For example:
Virgin Trains: VT (then number)
Great Western: GW
LNWR: LN
etc etc...

They already exist and wouldn't need to be created. For example the 1049 from Penzance to Paddington has a Retail Service ID of GW3204.

Also, if a train is cancelled and is advertised as such on a TOC website or on social media, it is often referred to as (for example) the 12:30 Edinburgh - London Kings Cross. If I have an AP ticket from Doncaster, that isn't a great deal of use to me. Knowing that train LN2364 had been cancelled would be useful, as the ID number would be on my booking confirmation.

I hadn't thought of that but yes that's another situation where they'd be useful. A tweet saying "We're sorry but VT4180 the 1210 London - Chester has been cancelled. Passengers should travel on either VT4150 the 1110 or VT4210 the 1310 service from London to Chester" would be more useful to people at intermediate stations.

An utterly pointless excercise then unless you think passengers stare at approaching trains.

It clearly only works if you announce it and it's not as if it would add much length or risk confusion by having it in announcements. For instance "The next train from Platform 16 will be SR0304 the 0930 Scotrail service to Aberdeen calling at..." versus "The next train from platform 16 will be the 0930 Scotrail service to...". But it still adds a useful piece of information for passengers when coupled with the Retail ID being on their booking confirmation and ticket/reservation.

 

[Bertie the bus]

It clearly only works if you announce it and it's not as if it would add much length or risk confusion by having it in announcements. For instance "The next train from Platform 16 will be SR0304 the 0930 Scotrail service to Aberdeen calling at..." versus "The next train from platform 16 will be the 0930 Scotrail service to...". But it still adds a useful piece of information for passengers when coupled with the Retail ID being on their booking confirmation and ticket/reservation.

It doesn't add any useful information at all. It would add pointless additional information that couldn't possibly help anybody.

 

[kristiang85]

Though of course whilst headcodes may be reused the same is not true of Retail Service IDs and indeed their format would probably be quite familiar to people who fly as they appear not dissimilar to flight numbers and could help avoid confusion. For instance GR5240 refers to the 0830 LNER service from Edinburgh to London whilst TP5117 refers to the 1002 TPE service from Newcastle to Manchester. Very similar to the way flights are ID'd, for example LH9348 refers to a Lufthansa flight from Heathrow to Chicago leaving at 1035.

I do think that giving Retail ID's more prominence could help passengers identify services particularly at busy stations or where the timetable means you can have two trains very close together operated by the same company. For example from Darlington southbound you often have one CrossCountry service leaving at around xx07 and another at xx12 both from the same platform. It only takes a little bit of disruption for the the xx07 to arrive around the time the xx12 is due. However if the Retail ID was more prominent then a passenger for the xx12 would have a ticket saying "Valid only on the xx12 XC1234 Darlington to Birmingham" which would help clue them into identifying that the train in the platform is actually the xx07 and not their train.

I don't think we should replace times with Retail ID's (as already mentioned it's been used since the year dot and is familiar and also works) but equally I do think they could be useful in providing more information that is clear, easy to understand and won't involve overloading the passenger. It's not as if announcements would get severely cluttered and neither would tickets/screens by adding the information for instance: "The next train from Platform 1 will be the 1112 XC1630 CrossCountry service to Plymouth calling at...".

Just because we've always done something one way doesn't mean we shouldn't think tweaking it

Indeed, this is what I mean. It will also help passengers on tickets restricted to one TOC only to be able to get the right train, as not everyone is familiar with liveries.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It doesn't add any useful information at all. It would add pointless additional information that couldn't possibly help anybody.

Then why it is considered vital information on the continent?
They use it to differentiate train types and level of service, and also for ticketing and reservations (supplements etc).
Your comment is rather like saying airlines shouldn't bother the public with flight numbers, just time and destination.
Network Rail still doesn't get that the public need to know the operator on its summary screens (not least for those with TOC-specific tickets).
Here, the BR view was that a train is a train is a train (same fares, flexible ticketing etc).
Today's railway is very different, with a great deal of differentiation between operators, fares and services on the same route.

 

[Esker-pades]

Indeed, this is what I mean. It will also help passengers on tickets restricted to one TOC only to be able to get the right train, as not everyone is familiar with liveries.

Announcements put "The XX:XX <TOC> service to <destination>" anyway.

 

[Bertie the bus]

I don't know and don't care why it is "vital" information on the continent.

I don't even know what differentiating between "train types and level of service" means or why anybody would care. 1st and standard class differentiates between level of service. You don't need another pointless code to do that.

As I've already said, this thread is just "they do it abroad so they should do it here".

 

[Bletchleyite]

It doesn't add any useful information at all. It would add pointless additional information that couldn't possibly help anybody.

You ever been at New St where two services to Edinburgh used to (may still) depart at the same time from adjacent platforms, one via the East Coast and one via the West Coast? At one time both were operated by Virgin XC, too...

 

[mrcheek]

The Taking of Pelham 1Z45 doesnt sound nearly as good as the original.

should we also change the lyrics to "Dont Stop Believin'" INstead of "She took the midnight train", "She took 2Z35"...

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Taking of Pelham 1Z45 doesnt sound nearly as good as the original.

should we also change the lyrics to "Dont Stop Believin'" INstead of "She took the midnight train", "She took 2Z35"...

Anyone would know that in the UK that would be either the 2359 or the 0001!

 

[MichaelAMW]

It doesn't add any useful information at all. It would add pointless additional information that couldn't possibly help anybody.

To answer all of your dismissive messages in one go, it's not about what "they" do elsewhere but in fact it does add useful information. Useful information that definitely makes it easier when travelling in other countries. In spite of what you believe, it could and even does add information that could possibly help someone.

Of greatest use is the fact that it's a unique ID, meaning you won't get on another train that happens to have the same destination. It also helps identify your train if you don't know where its final destination is, particularly at large and busy stations where there may be more that one departure at the same time. Portion working also has the potential to confuse, regarding final destination, but a unique ID helps with that too.

 

[transmanche]

It doesn't add any useful information at all. It would add pointless additional information that couldn't possibly help anybody.

Lots of people have politely explained how it can be useful, but you reject it because you can't see the benefit.

• Nowadays, to locate your train you have to know where the train is going to, as well as where you are going to! If I'm travelling to York on the 14:15 Transpennine Express service from Newcastle. I need to know that the train is scheduled to go to Manchester Airport. I wouldn't need to know that if the train is listed as service TP5357.
• On-board announcements about validity of advance tickets would be shorter, more precise and easier-to-understand: "If you're travelling on an Advance ticket, make sure that it's valid on train TP5357" rather than "If you're travelling on an Advance ticket, make sure that it's valid on the 14:15 Transpennine Express service from Newcastle to Manchester Airport".
• Have you ever had that pause in an on-board announcement when a conductor/train manager desperately tries to remember what the scheduled departure time is from the station you're just leaving? It would be much easier if they only had to say "This is train TP5357..."
• Lots of people are familiar with how airlines use flight numbers, so they won't find the use of train numbers an alien concept.

Of course, to have full benefit it would need to be adopted properly across ticketing, PIS, on-board announcement and station announcements.