Lack of clarity on Rail Replacement Bus services

[markymark2000]

Cost.

I suppose TOCs miss the fact that other things that cost money. If a person is in the wrong place, they will often ring up the TOC but there isn't enough time to see if a bus did stop or not (unless there is a coordinator there) and so alternative transport is sorted rather than working out who to point the finger at. This could be the normal bus turning around, a standby bus being sent or taxis being ordered. All come at significant cost. Plus by the time any transport gets to the person, they have normally gone. Add that onto the fact that if the railways have given out the wrong information, the person should then be able to get delay repay as it's not their fault they are delayed, it's the railways who put the wrong information up. Delay repay costs a lot of money too in some of the instances. Add up cost of alternative transport and delay repay. You're easily looking at a few per week on rail replacement blocks. Add all that up, it should be more than worth the investment.

As for the cost, I do struggle to see how it would be difficult to create a database. I think the bigger issue is unwillingness to do something that it percieved will have no savings because sending alternative transport for missed passengers kind of just gets ignored.


This is just the costs for actually missed passengers who complain. You'll have others who complain later on after they have gotten alternative transport and so on. That's not a direct cost though that they see but to the passengers, it is a cost. They've had to pay out for more transport to ensure that they can get where they are going.

Having such opaque information on rail replacement service is costing train operators financially and is costing them through

Thing is, once a database is sorted, it only has to be updated when things change. If there is no change, the database doesn't need updating. How often are facilities at stations or rail replacement bus stops changed? Every few months. Temporary changes to facilities due to staffing problems or buses moving for 1 day due to road works for example I think would be too much for the train operators to sort but basic database of facilities which only needs updating quarterly (or there abouts) shouldn't be too much to ask for.

 

[zwk500]

Having such opaque information on rail replacement service is costing train operators financially and is costing them through

But these costs are neither known in full nor attached to a tocs accounts, so they are not important to reduce. A poor attitude, but the one the government encourages.

Thing is, once a database is sorted, it only has to be updated when things change. If there is no change, the database doesn't need updating. How often are facilities at stations or rail replacement bus stops changed? Every few months. Temporary changes to facilities due to staffing problems or buses moving for 1 day due to road works for example I think would be too much for the train operators to sort but basic database of facilities which only needs updating quarterly (or there abouts) shouldn't be too much to ask for.

There will be a development fee for the first implementation and then ongoing update fees as all the other software around a Internet accessible database moves on such as operating systems, Web browsers, oracle, etc. It's not just the data that needs maintaining.
There'll also be corrections, amendments, temporary changes etc that will all need to be kept up to date.
Then there is the question or who pays? NR, a TOC, all TOCs, the RDG, retailers, bus companies, the government? And if these people pay, how do they fund it? Debt or fare rises?
Unfortuantely much easier to do nothing at all, despite the impact on the passenger.

 

[The Planner]

Thing is, once a database is sorted, it only has to be updated when things change. If there is no change, the database doesn't need updating. How often are facilities at stations or rail replacement bus stops changed? Every few months. Temporary changes to facilities due to staffing problems or buses moving for 1 day due to road works for example I think would be too much for the train operators to sort but basic database of facilities which only needs updating quarterly (or there abouts) shouldn't be too much to ask for.

@zwk500 has nipped in as I was typing. Their last comment is the important one. Its about who is responsible for it. Its a behaviours issue, but you spend more time arguing over that then setting the thing up. Nobody wants to be in a position of being blamed if it goes wrong.

 

[markymark2000]

@zwk500 has nipped in as I was typing. Their last comment is the important one. Its about who is responsible for it. Its a behaviours issue, but you spend more time arguing over that then setting the thing up. Nobody wants to be in a position of being blamed if it goes wrong.

So it's just another thing that dies before it's set up because of the various railway organisations who simply couldn't care less about passengers. This is basic stuff to set up. The DFT and Rail Delivery Group have literally endless amounts of databases for various things already and yet to create one for station facilities so every TOC shows the same information online, that's too difficult.

It's no wonder people get so irate about the railways when basic things like this are too difficult because people who are paid silly money to take responsibility, are too petrified of starting up a database. God forbid any of them worked outside of the railway and actually had to work and take responsibility to make their money. Absolutely beyond belief that a basic database is too much for the industry.

 

[zwk500]

So it's just another thing that dies before it's set up because of the various railway organisations who simply couldn't care less about passengers. This is basic stuff to set up. The DFT and Rail Delivery Group have literally endless amounts of databases for various things already and yet to create one for station facilities so every TOC shows the same information online, that's too difficult.

It's no wonder people get so irate about the railways when basic things like this are too difficult because people who are paid silly money to take responsibility, are too petrified of starting up a database. God forbid any of them worked outside of the railway and actually had to work and take responsibility to make their money. Absolutely beyond belief that a basic database is too much for the industry.

It's not basic, there are a large amount of costs involved to be allocated between 20 or so different stakeholders. The information must be collated, corrected and communicated from every station in the country to the database manager, which requires agreement on everything from whether or not to include a map to which email address to use.
For instance, should the payments for the staff be split based on stations managed or buses operated? What should NR pay as the station owners?

However it is poor that no central direction is forthcoming because this is an issue that could be solved and would benefit passengers.

 

[800001]

Must say I was mightily impressed with the rail replacement busses whilst York North was closed last week.

I used them from Darlington and Northallerton to York. At both the busses were held a few minutes to wait for late running services from the North.

At York, very well organised, large signs and banners directing to long stay, a large ‘Marquee’ with seating, well organised departure points.

Busses I used all departed on time, but there was plenty of stand by coaches in the even either busses were full, or if trains were late.

At Darlington and York, stagecoach coordinators were managing the coaches departing.

 

[markymark2000]

I've done some digging since and it seems that National Rail Data Centre has an XML file with all station details in, including rail replacement bus stops. https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/100298.aspx. This may mean this conversation has been a little bit meaningless but does open up some questions.

Who updates all of this data and how often this is all updated (It seems you'd have to sign up for the dataset to see who last edited it and when). If it has all of the information in it then who is stopping it being used in journey planners?

 

[Dai Corner]

I've done some digging since and it seems that National Rail Data Centre has an XML file with all station details in, including rail replacement bus stops. https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/100298.aspx. This may mean this conversation has been a little bit meaningless but does open up some questions.

Who updates all of this data and how often this is all updated (It seems you'd have to sign up for the dataset to see who last edited it and when). If it has all of the information in it then who is stopping it being used in journey planners?

As previously discussed, whoever has to authorise expenditure on keeping the database up to date and the necessary web development work.

 

[Taunton]

Delay repay costs a lot of money too in some of the instances.

Is that not an RUK urban legend? I was given to believe that well under 5% of those entitled actually claim. Are there published figures of how much would be entitled, and how much is actually paid out?

 

[Joey Beauchamp]

Must say I was mightily impressed with the rail replacement busses whilst York North was closed last week.

I used them from Darlington and Northallerton to York. At both the busses were held a few minutes to wait for late running services from the North.

At York, very well organised, large signs and banners directing to long stay, a large ‘Marquee’ with seating, well organised departure points.

Busses I used all departed on time, but there was plenty of stand by coaches in the even either busses were full, or if trains were late.

At Darlington and York, stagecoach coordinators were managing the coaches departing.

I think the provision and management at larger stations is usually okay. Also when there is a frequent service due to the large amount of passengers it's also pretty good.

But at smaller stations I have no confidence in a rail replacement bus turning up as scheduled.

It doesn't make any sense that buses don't wait until close to the advertised time to depart - not only are they not following the rules that apply to train services, but public buses are also supposed to stick to the timetable and not depart early!

 

[800001]

I think the provision and management at larger stations is usually okay. Also when there is a frequent service due to the large amount of passengers it's also pretty good.

But at smaller stations I have no confidence in a rail replacement bus turning up as scheduled.

It doesn't make any sense that buses don't wait until close to the advertised time to depart - not only are they not following the rules that apply to train services, but public buses are also supposed to stick to the timetable and not depart early!

Public busses can be up to 3 minutes early I believe if running earlier they have to sit time. (So I’ve been told my a friend who works for Arriva).

 

[Dai Corner]

Public busses can be up to 3 minutes early I believe if running earlier they have to sit time. (So I’ve been told my a friend who works for Arriva).

I thought it was one minute for registered local bus services (which rail replacement buses aren't).

 

[800001]

I thought it was one minute for registered local bus services (which rail replacement buses aren't).

Hence I wrote (so I believe)!

 

[markymark2000]

Is that not an RUK urban legend? I was given to believe that well under 5% of those entitled actually claim. Are there published figures of how much would be entitled, and how much is actually paid out?

I think that numbers are increasing on delay repay. I know certainly some staff are telling people to do it more. I know I only claim though if the amount is worth having back.

As previously discussed, whoever has to authorise expenditure on keeping the database up to date and the necessary web development work.

Given it's on National Rail and the portal shows Rail Delivery Group and stuff, It would be easy to assume that it's RDG who have control over it. In which case, it's surely in their members (the train operators) best interests to work this into journey planners to reduce complaints and have less people missing buses (so saves money elsewhere, though as you say it's not accounted in a certain way so they may not see it as saving money).

I think the provision and management at larger stations is usually okay. Also when there is a frequent service due to the large amount of passengers it's also pretty good.

But at smaller stations I have no confidence in a rail replacement bus turning up as scheduled.

It doesn't make any sense that buses don't wait until close to the advertised time to depart

Every block is different. If it's a high profile one, often where Network Rail are involved and it's a major project, the facilities are much better. Three Bridges style blocks stands out in my mind really with Marquees and coffee stand etc etc. You go to Cardiff Central though, you have no seating anywhere (closest seats on the platform), no shelter really as the roof is too high so the weather kind of gets you still. You can stand inside but then you block the gateline or the ticket office. Toilets are inside through the barriers and up the stairs so you have to be quick else miss the bus. Signage is minimal. Three Bridges is no expense spared, Cardiff Central is no expense at all. Radyr on the other hand has a bus shelter in the car park with seats. No local bus (because it wouldn't be able to turn around normally) but it's a special rail replacement bus stop. That's just some examples but there are plenty more examples for large stations with high frequency which have minimal facilities and nothing put on for bus replacement. It's extremely rare for a block to have any extras provided.

For buses which turn up at the right place but leaving early, 55% of the time, it's a driver issue of some kind. 35% it's down to TOCs putting different information online to what they have given to the contractor (and so consequently different info online as to what is on the bus drivers board), 5% of the time it's staff sending buses early (reasons vary. Including trying to prevent delays because they know there is disruption ahead or ignorance to the fact that someone may walk up to the stop for the time the bus is due) around 4% the drivers haven't been given timetables (standby bus and they haven't been given the board or there is an issue somewhere that means the driver wasn't given a board to start with) and 1% is an overcrowded bus so no point in waiting. Could be that the bus has to go past another stop anyway

 

[Dai Corner]

You go to Cardiff Central though, you have no seating anywhere (closest seats on the platform), no shelter really as the roof is too high so the weather kind of gets you still. You can stand inside but then you block the gateline or the ticket office. Toilets are inside through the barriers and up the stairs so you have to be quick else miss the bus. Signage is minimal.

Interesting, as TfW are pretty good at dealing with the crowds after major events in Cardiff.

 

[markymark2000]

Interesting, as TfW are pretty good at dealing with the crowds after major events in Cardiff.

I can't comment on that as I've not been there for event days. Try going down for a rail replacement day and it's normally very different. They did put out about 12 barriers at one point for a queueing system but that seemed to have stopped the past few times I've been there. Not sure if it will make a return or not.

 

[WAB]

It's the same with rail link buses:

Just look at how the LNER website handles Kings Cross - Euston - Bangor - Caernarfon. It barely mentions the Tube leg and the bus leg is entirely missing! No wonder passengers get confused:



It is a little better for the St Andrews Bus but it doesn't seem particularly obvious that it's a bus (let alone a service bus - they don't even give the route number or where it departs from. And will passengers expect to see a ScotRail bus, when in fact it will be a Stagecoach 42, 94, 94A, or 99?):




Poor all-round, really. Buses just don't fit into the National Rail network because of the industry's disinterest.

 

[Starmill]

It's not basic, there are a large amount of costs involved to be allocated between 20 or so different stakeholders. The information must be collated, corrected and communicated from every station in the country to the database manager, which requires agreement on everything from whether or not to include a map to which email address to use.
For instance, should the payments for the staff be split based on stations managed or buses operated? What should NR pay as the station owners?

However it is poor that no central direction is forthcoming because this is an issue that could be solved and would benefit passengers.

I think that the point being made by the person you're quoting is that the railway is a costly service, usually more so than its direct competitors (buses and private cars, certainly more so than the budget airlines) and on top of this the industry receives a vast public subsidy. In other words, it's a reasonable expectation that proper information on rail replacement buses is already going to be included within the most basic customer service requirement of running the business. No different to staffing the call centre and dealing with letters and emails of comment, complaint or praise.

 

[Stephen42]

I've done some digging since and it seems that National Rail Data Centre has an XML file with all station details in, including rail replacement bus stops. https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/100298.aspx. This may mean this conversation has been a little bit meaningless but does open up some questions.

Who updates all of this data and how often this is all updated (It seems you'd have to sign up for the dataset to see who last edited it and when). If it has all of the information in it then who is stopping it being used in journey planners?

No idea on the update process but had an auth token for another datafeed so had a look at what's there. There aren't individual change times on entries within a station, out of 2594 stations (not all actual stations) for 299 the change date is more than 3 years ago. Roughly half (1248) haven't been changed in the last year. The data could have been reviewed and validated as correct but there's no way of telling from the data or if the replacement bus part was reviewed at the time of the last change.

That's before getting to the fun of what's included, nearly all stations have some text but that doesn't mean it's helpful. The most common is "Rail replacement bus stop locations are shown in the 'Getting to and from the station' section under 'onward travel'" which isn't useful by itself. Eastham Rake the text is "Eastham Rake, Wirral". Some list alternative stops for dates in the past including one in 2016, the change date for that station being 4 years later. Others encourage you to be on the correct side of the road without saying which side is which, some you need to know if the bus starts/terminates at the station which a journey planner may not include by default.

The data is html which means needing to run through a sanitizer to reduce security risks and get rid of margins, font size changes which won't look right on the site etc. While there is a map field only 8 stations have that populated, several have links in the html but many without a domain so you need to hope it's at nationalrail.co.uk and that the link still works. The onward travel field in the above is also html making it difficult to reliably extract a map link and many onward travel sections link to bus websites rather than replacement bus locations which means the contents aren't always worth showing. In its current state I can fully understand why it's not shown on any journey planners.

 

[markymark2000]

No idea on the update process but had an auth token for another datafeed so had a look at what's there. There aren't individual change times on entries within a station, out of 2594 stations (not all actual stations) for 299 the change date is more than 3 years ago. Roughly half (1248) haven't been changed in the last year. The data could have been reviewed and validated as correct but there's no way of telling from the data or if the replacement bus part was reviewed at the time of the last change.

Arguebly some stations may not have had any changes in that time as if there is no way to see if the information has been reviewed, it's difficult to draw any conclusions from that.

That's before getting to the fun of what's included, nearly all stations have some text but that doesn't mean it's helpful. The most common is "Rail replacement bus stop locations are shown in the 'Getting to and from the station' section under 'onward travel'" which isn't useful by itself. Eastham Rake the text is "Eastham Rake, Wirral". Some list alternative stops for dates in the past including one in 2016, the change date for that station being 4 years later. Others encourage you to be on the correct side of the road without saying which side is which, some you need to know if the bus starts/terminates at the station which a journey planner may not include by default.

While some station information is completely useless, if the information was more visible, any faults would be picked up quicker. Right now, the only way to find these faults is by someone going to 'Stations' pages on TOCs websites or National Rail and reading through all of the information. Finding the fault and alerting the train operator. How many people go through to find the bus stop (given it's relatively hidden on all TOCs websites)? Of those how many know the right stops and consequently inform train operators of this and how many give up and try to find the information another way.

The more people who see something, the more chance of issues being noticed and reported.

The data is html which means needing to run through a sanitizer to reduce security risks and get rid of margins, font size changes which won't look right on the site etc. While there is a map field only 8 stations have that populated, several have links in the html but many without a domain so you need to hope it's at nationalrail.co.uk and that the link still works. The onward travel field in the above is also html making it difficult to reliably extract a map link and many onward travel sections link to bus websites rather than replacement bus locations which means the contents aren't always worth showing. In its current state I can fully understand why it's not shown on any journey planners.

Which maps are displayed? If you mean the 'Onward travel posters' which show the rail replacement bus stop on the map, I think have to be installed at all stations, if not required, they are at the majority of stations. In which case, someone, somewhere has these posters. It's just a case of putting them onto the world wide web and linking to them.
If you mean coordinates or something like that with a link to google maps and the exact coordinates, while it may help some, I think that could be too far to ask of the industry. If the written descriptions were half decent, you'd be fine.

Looking at the information which comes with the NationalRail database (linked above in #37), it implies that you can pick and choose every single bit of information, even just taking the rail replacement stop area. That could surely be worked out somehow. Developers always find ways of extracting data in a certain way.

 

[Stephen42]

Arguebly some stations may not have had any changes in that time as if there is no way to see if the information has been reviewed, it's difficult to draw any conclusions from that.


While some station information is completely useless, if the information was more visible, any faults would be picked up quicker. Right now, the only way to find these faults is by someone going to 'Stations' pages on TOCs websites or National Rail and reading through all of the information. Finding the fault and alerting the train operator. How many people go through to find the bus stop (given it's relatively hidden on all TOCs websites)? Of those how many know the right stops and consequently inform train operators of this and how many give up and try to find the information another way.

The more people who see something, the more chance of issues being noticed and reported.



Which maps are displayed? If you mean the 'Onward travel posters' which show the rail replacement bus stop on the map, I think have to be installed at all stations, if not required, they are at the majority of stations. In which case, someone, somewhere has these posters. It's just a case of putting them onto the world wide web and linking to them.
If you mean coordinates or something like that with a link to google maps and the exact coordinates, while it may help some, I think that could be too far to ask of the industry. If the written descriptions were half decent, you'd be fine.

Looking at the information which comes with the NationalRail database (linked above in #37), it implies that you can pick and choose every single bit of information, even just taking the rail replacement stop area. That could surely be worked out somehow. Developers always find ways of extracting data in a certain way.

Sorry could have been clearer, I had a login for another datafeed which allowed me to access the one you mentioned in post 37. All the analysis was based on what's present in there and the challenges of trying to use that data in a journey planner. In short I wouldn't say the data quality is sufficient to present on a journey planner.

For onward travel it is referring to the section on station information pages, for example the National Rail page for Alexandra Palace is here with that text under the 'Staffing and general services' section. The text for rail replacement buses assumes you are on page with all the info populated. The map it refers to is on National Rail here, the date on it is 2016, the TfL bus routes still look accurate but unless I'm missing something the stops for replacement buses aren't actually shown. This was the first one I tried and I'm not planning to look at the other 194 maps where the rail replacement bus text has the same value to see how common that is.

While increasing visibility would help raise faults quicker, the provider publishing the data will get the bulk of queries/complaints not the supplier of the data. First line support (who passengers reach on making a query) are unlikely to have direct communications with staff from TOCs who can answer queries on bus stops so those queries cost the provider considerable staff time as well potential refunds for those misled. Any team embarking on the feature may decide the software needs to support provider overrides of the data or suppression for stations where it's wrong. TOCs rely on a supplier for their journey planner so the cost to retrieve/display/edit & improve the data could be a 5 or even 6 figure sum depending on scope.

The benefits of doing so is potentially higher conversion when a bus is involved, but commission is small and the more bus replacement is mentioned may actually lower conversion. Even with the system above, it's crude and won't give advice for a particular leg of where to wait or show where the bus is to give confidence while travelling. It would be lovely if there was better integration, but ultimately the individual providers have low incentive and high costs for going about it. It's also one of a number of issues which I'd suggest would need to be dealt with as a larger scale project to fully evaluate passenger expectations from journey planners to ensure information provided is reliable and easy to use.

 

[markymark2000]

Sorry could have been clearer, I had a login for another datafeed which allowed me to access the one you mentioned in post 37. All the analysis was based on what's present in there and the challenges of trying to use that data in a journey planner. In short I wouldn't say the data quality is sufficient to present on a journey planner.

If more people care about providing the information, the information would be much better quality. The constant lack of care from the industry for passenger experience is exactly what is causing the issue of poor data.

For onward travel it is referring to the section on station information pages, for example the National Rail page for Alexandra Palace is here with that text under the 'Staffing and general services' section. The text for rail replacement buses assumes you are on page with all the info populated. The map it refers to is on National Rail here, the date on it is 2016, the TfL bus routes still look accurate but unless I'm missing something the stops for replacement buses aren't actually shown. This was the first one I tried and I'm not planning to look at the other 194 maps where the rail replacement bus text has the same value to see how common that is.

The number of 'onward travel maps' posted online seems to have vastly reduced. Why that is though is a bit strange since the posters are still being put up in stations so why isn't someone using those posters, putting them into PDF format and uploading them? OR is it another one of those forgotten things that no one thinks about because people who walk, cycle or use other forms of public transport simply don't matter to the train operators. Narrow minded bosses who get taxpayer funded cars wrongly believing that people only get to/from train stations by parking!

The Alexandra Palace map isn't the best, granted. I've just gone through around 20 stations. TFW seem to be the worst with many of theirs having no maps. Other TOCs seemed to vary with some having big gaps of nothing but then also having a collection of certain stations with them. Some of them as recent as October 2022 from Northern, including Stanlow and Thornton station!

While increasing visibility would help raise faults quicker, the provider publishing the data will get the bulk of queries/complaints not the supplier of the data. First line support (who passengers reach on making a query) are unlikely to have direct communications with staff from TOCs who can answer queries on bus stops so those queries cost the provider considerable staff time as well potential refunds for those misled. Any team embarking on the feature may decide the software needs to support provider overrides of the data or suppression for stations where it's wrong. TOCs rely on a supplier for their journey planner so the cost to retrieve/display/edit & improve the data could be a 5 or even 6 figure sum depending on scope.

Throwing up customer support barriers is merely just the industry pushing their anti passenger agenda. It's codswallop. There shouldn't be any increase in queries regarding this. If anything, there would be a reduction in queries since everyone will have more information right infront of them. None of this 'The bus didn't stop where I thought it would' or 'I missed the bus because I didn't know where it stopped' or any of the other 1000s of queries/complaints which already happen because people aren't given any information.

I mean, why do we even do train timetables. If you put a timetable out there, people are only going to want to use the service and then put in queries and complaints about said service. Surely the best course of action would be to remove all timetables from online and close all journey planners. After all, don't want anyone to actually be able to plan a journey or ask us questions about it!

If it would cost a 6 figure sum to script this into a journey planner, then whomever is doing it is rinsing the industry. The only way that sort of money would be paid is if backhanders are involved. There is no logical reason why something like this would cost so much.

The benefits of doing so is potentially higher conversion when a bus is involved, but commission is small and the more bus replacement is mentioned may actually lower conversion. Even with the system above, it's crude and won't give advice for a particular leg of where to wait or show where the bus is to give confidence while travelling. It would be lovely if there was better integration, but ultimately the individual providers have low incentive and high costs for going about it. It's also one of a number of issues which I'd suggest would need to be dealt with as a larger scale project to fully evaluate passenger expectations from journey planners to ensure information provided is reliable and easy to use.

Not giving people information on where buses stop is the equivalent of being at Euston and they took down all of the platform numbers and didn't advertise any platform numbers for the trains. Just said 12:50 to Manchester, that's all your information. It just wouldn't happen. This is the equivalent of that. Giving people zero information and so they can't plan their journey properly. Made worse stations like Flint for example where the buses stop 5 minute walk away from the station and over a very busy road. IF you turn up to the station car park waiting to get your bus, by the time you realise the bus doesn't stop there, the bus will be half way to Prestatyn. The reason why, as industry, platform numbers started getting promoted more on journey planners and things like that was to enable people to plan their journey.

Given the frequency at which some train operators run replacement buses too, surely it's the least that they could do.

 

[nlogax]

Might it not be an idea for TOCs to send their replacement bus info to the likes of Google who already provide a very decent travel planning tool in Google Maps? Specifically can RRBs be accommodated as additions in GTFS?

 

[Joey Beauchamp]

Might it not be an idea for TOCs to send their replacement bus info to the likes of Google who already provide a very decent travel planning tool in Google Maps? Specifically can RRBs be accommodated as additions in GTFS?

This is one thing that has really flummoxed me: Google Maps not only showed my rail replacement bus that had disappeared from the station departure screen and the online live departures, it even showed it as being delayed and by how long! Where did Google get this information from and why didn't the train company have the same info?

 

[nlogax]

Google Maps not only showed my rail replacement bus that had disappeared from the station departure screen and the online live departures, it even showed it as being delayed and by how long! Where did Google get this information from and why didn't the train company have the same info?

Had no idea they were already showing..guess that answers my question!

 

[Stephen42]

If more people care about providing the information, the information would be much better quality. The constant lack of care from the industry for passenger experience is exactly what is causing the issue of poor data.


The number of 'onward travel maps' posted online seems to have vastly reduced. Why that is though is a bit strange since the posters are still being put up in stations so why isn't someone using those posters, putting them into PDF format and uploading them? OR is it another one of those forgotten things that no one thinks about because people who walk, cycle or use other forms of public transport simply don't matter to the train operators. Narrow minded bosses who get taxpayer funded cars wrongly believing that people only get to/from train stations by parking!

The Alexandra Palace map isn't the best, granted. I've just gone through around 20 stations. TFW seem to be the worst with many of theirs having no maps. Other TOCs seemed to vary with some having big gaps of nothing but then also having a collection of certain stations with them. Some of them as recent as October 2022 from Northern, including Stanlow and Thornton station!



Throwing up customer support barriers is merely just the industry pushing their anti passenger agenda. It's codswallop. There shouldn't be any increase in queries regarding this. If anything, there would be a reduction in queries since everyone will have more information right infront of them. None of this 'The bus didn't stop where I thought it would' or 'I missed the bus because I didn't know where it stopped' or any of the other 1000s of queries/complaints which already happen because people aren't given any information.

For the first journey planner to try implementing it would get an increase in queries until the underlying data issues are fixed. There are 70 different usernames in the last change record at the station level. I think where we disagree is I'm not confident that showing the data more prominently will lead to quick fixes, this data is available on National Rail and most TOC websites under station information pages already.

I mean, why do we even do train timetables. If you put a timetable out there, people are only going to want to use the service and then put in queries and complaints about said service. Surely the best course of action would be to remove all timetables from online and close all journey planners. After all, don't want anyone to actually be able to plan a journey or ask us questions about it!

If it would cost a 6 figure sum to script this into a journey planner, then whomever is doing it is rinsing the industry. The only way that sort of money would be paid is if backhanders are involved. There is no logical reason why something like this would cost so much.

There is a difference between train operators and train information providers or retailers. Train operators will provide retailing facilities as well but the journey planner is normally an outsourced implementation that's branded to their site. That means they don't own the code, can't pick who does it and when picking provider may have focused on overall cost rather than rate card for one off custom features. 6 figures wouldn't be for a basic version, but is plausible if the requester feels the data issues are sufficient to need a layer on top to track, edit and enhance the data to make it a high quality resource to tempt people to use their planner.

Not giving people information on where buses stop is the equivalent of being at Euston and they took down all of the platform numbers and didn't advertise any platform numbers for the trains. Just said 12:50 to Manchester, that's all your information. It just wouldn't happen. This is the equivalent of that. Giving people zero information and so they can't plan their journey properly. Made worse stations like Flint for example where the buses stop 5 minute walk away from the station and over a very busy road. IF you turn up to the station car park waiting to get your bus, by the time you realise the bus doesn't stop there, the bus will be half way to Prestatyn. The reason why, as industry, platform numbers started getting promoted more on journey planners and things like that was to enable people to plan their journey.

Given the frequency at which some train operators run replacement buses too, surely it's the least that they could do.

Yes, I agree the industry could do far better. The question is who pays and until there is a single organisation with fewer stakeholders to answer to it seems unlikely anyone will.

 

[markymark2000]

For the first journey planner to try implementing it would get an increase in queries until the underlying data issues are fixed. There are 70 different usernames in the last change record at the station level. I think where we disagree is I'm not confident that showing the data more prominently will lead to quick fixes,

The data issues can be fixed. If I was paid, I'd go through all of the stations and fix the problems but why should I do it off my own back when there are people within the TOCs or at National Rail who are paid to maintain this information.

this data is available on National Rail and most TOC websites under station information pages already.

It's hidden though so people aren't seeing the mistakes and if they do, how many are reporting them. When things are noted on the journey planners, it's all picked up. For example a number of people pick up on TFW saying 'reservations available' but not offering reservations. This gets noticed when it's in an easy to reach area.

I mean, how much information is hidden on TOCs pages now about Covid. There will be loads because it's in areas which aren't checked and no one looks at them. The same applies here.

 

[TUC]

It's not basic, there are a large amount of costs involved to be allocated between 20 or so different stakeholders. The information must be collated, corrected and communicated from every station in the country to the database manager, which requires agreement on everything from whether or not to include a map to which email address to use.
For instance, should the payments for the staff be split based on stations managed or buses operated? What should NR pay as the station owners?

You mean the kind of tasks and challenges that multiple infrastructure businesses face and just get on with?

 

[zwk500]

You mean the kind of tasks and challenges that multiple infrastructure businesses face and just get on with?

Yes, but the railway has show itself to have a problem with 'just getting on with things', largely correlating to the level of DfT involvement in day-to-day running of it.

 

[TUC]

Yes, but the railway has show itself to have a problem with 'just getting on with things', largely correlating to the level of DfT involvement in day-to-day running of it.

DfT involvement has made it worse, but the railway has never been good at just getting on with things. Cultural,y, it seems incapable of, once a question has been asked, deciding it is not very important and ignoring it. Every question is treated as equally important and needing an answer, even when they get in the way of delivering what really matters.