How off-putting is it to change trains in GB - from rail regulars via 'normals' to OAPs to foreign visitors?

[HSTEd]

The rise of easy online access to journey planners should provide the opportunity to move away from the tyranny of clockface timetabling, and that would open up more scope to offer through services (or better connections) occasionally through the day.

So if you miss the train you are utterly stuffed?

That is hardly going to fill people with confidence to use the railway.

Public transport's biggest issues are things like non-linear delays.
I can be 30 seconds later to the bus stop and be 12+ minutes late to work as a result.

Handfuls of direct trains are going to make this problem even worse.
If I'm a few seconds late my trip is effectively ruined and I might as well go home.

As a result, I have to add huge padding to the start of the journey and my effective journey time goes through the roof.

 

[miklcct]

Public transport's biggest issues are things like non-linear delays.
I can be 30 seconds later to the bus stop and be 12+ minutes late to work as a result.

Equally I can be 15 minutes late to the bus stop and get back on time as a result as well. It works both ways.

 

[TrenHotel]

As far as I'm aware, it's simply part of the hard coded data that the journey planners have available. For personal reason I regularly download the machine-readable timetable data that ATOC makes available. If I recall correctly, the data includes a list of all stations, and one of the data fields for each station is an integer that represents 'interchange size'. I have no idea though how it was originally decided what values to put in this field.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Apr 2023 ==



I actually have a more modern and very similar comparison: 8-10 years ago, I often travelled between Charing Cross and Woolwich/Abbey Wood. The choice was basically a direct train every half hour from Charing Cross, or make my way to London Bridge from where at the time there were trains every 10 minutes. You might think that was a good option, since the time spent actually on the train was basically the same whether you changed or not. But in practice, I almost always made sure I arrived at Charing Cross at a suitable time for the direct train. I figured that, by the time I'd faffed around changing and waiting at London Bridge, if it was anything less than about a 20 minute wait at CHX, I may as well wait for the direct train, and since I didn't like waiting, I would time my journeys to avoid that. That seems to show I had a strong preference for not changing... BUT.... the key thing for this discussion. If the direct train had not existed, I would not have made significantly fewer journeys: In that case, I would simply have got used to changing at London Bridge. So having the direct train made things a little easier for me, but it didn't impact how much I would have used the train.

I made similar journeys on the same line - the direct train was good, and coming home it give me something to aim for at Charing Cross, but with a train every 10 minutes, changing at London Bridge was no big deal.

Now there are fewer trains, and interchanging can result in a significant time penalty on a relatively short journey, I've started to use that line a lot less now and am using alternative routes - often the Tube from North Greenwich - or just making different journeys for leisure trips.

 

[hkstudent]

I made similar journeys on the same line - the direct train was good, and coming home it give me something to aim for at Charing Cross, but with a train every 10 minutes, changing at London Bridge was no big deal.

Now there are fewer trains, and interchanging can result in a significant time penalty on a relatively short journey, I've started to use that line a lot less now and am using alternative routes - often the Tube from North Greenwich - or just making different journeys for leisure trips.

That's the reason why in TfL's bid for metrotisation, low frequency at the end trigger more people to take bus and change for morw frequent tube, taking Eltham as example

 

[mangyiscute]

I guess it depends on how much you trust the railways to be on time too - I personally will always happily plan schedules with sub 10 minutes changed onto hourly services as long as I then have an alternative plan if i miss that train. I also am not usually on time critical journeys, which does also help.
I did find it amusing the one time that I had a 35 minute change at Carlisle and we got in 34 minutes late - thankfully the ex euston train to glasgow was sent ahead of the dumfries service I changed onto so it was a perfectly fine change

 

[trainophile]

Before I go back and read the last three pages of this thread, could someone explain what "railhead' means in the context used several times on page #1? Google is no help!

 

[zwk500]

Before I go back and read the last three pages of this thread, could someone explain what "railhead' means in the context used several times on page #1? Google is no help!

In this specific context, to railhead is to drive to a station further than your nearest one in order to take advantage of a better service provision at that station (be that parking, frequency, destinations, journey times, or any other reason).
It can also be used to mean driving to the nearest station if that is a significant distance away, but here the context is that people are driving beyond their nearest station (on a branch) to access a mainline junction.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Before I go back and read the last three pages of this thread, could someone explain what "railhead' means in the context used several times on page #1? Google is no help!

It means driving to the station.

 

[trainophile]

Thanks both. That makes it clearer.

 

[TrenHotel]

In this specific context, to railhead is to drive to a station further than your nearest one in order to take advantage of a better service provision at that station (be that parking, frequency, destinations, journey times, or any other reason).
It can also be used to mean driving to the nearest station if that is a significant distance away, but here the context is that people are driving beyond their nearest station (on a branch) to access a mainline junction.

I'm sure I've seen this used in a slightly different London context too - to take a bus to a Tube station that is further away to take advantage of a better service or cheaper fares than those available from a closer National Rail station. Brixton, Finsbury Park and North Greenwich would be examples.

 

[zwk500]

I'm sure I've seen this used in a slightly different London context too - to take a bus to a Tube station that is further away to take advantage of a better service or cheaper fares than those available from a closer National Rail station. Brixton, Finsbury Park and North Greenwich would be examples.

Yes, as the context shifts you can use railheading to mean basically 'traveling to the railway' in many different interpretations.

 

[nanstallon]

I don't like changing trains because the railways don't hold connections and I don't like worrying about my train being on time and not missing the connection. It is so bad that i usually take the bus to Redruth which is on the main line, rather than train from my local station (Penryn) which is on a branch line to Truro, but frequently there are signalling problems on the branch, with trains being cancelled.

 

[chris_in_salop]

Before I go back and read the last three pages of this thread, could someone explain what "railhead' means in the context used several times on page #1? Google is no help!

To give an example local to me, colleagues in Shropshire going to London will drive to Stafford or Warwick Parkway, rather than go to their nearest station at Shrewsbury, as the line to Shrewsbury is regarded as slow and unreliable.

 

[zwk500]

To give an example local to me, colleagues in Shropshire going to London will drive to Stafford or Warwick Parkway, rather than go to their nearest station at Shrewsbury, as the line to Shrewsbury is regarded as slow and unreliable.

That's quite a dramatic difference, and shows that we could decarbonise a significant amount if the just got the fundamentals right.

 

[norbitonflyer]

Certainly. For many years Lincoln's through service to London consisted of one train that got to Lincoln just before the pubs shut and left again before breakfast - hardly likely to attract tourists to that historic city. East Coast, having taken over from National Express, reneged on the franchise commitment to provide a service every 2 hours.
The lack of decent connections was exacerbated by the fact that the trains that should have gone to Lincoln terminated at Newark and sat in the one platform that Lincoln connections could use, making it impossible for connections to be made until it had left again.
A decent service would have allowed my teenage children and my father to see a lot more of each other, but neither were happy to rely on the connections at Newark being honoured (my most recent experience, when I had to make a day trip to attend a funeral so driving was out of the question) had an IC225s doors slammed in the faces of over 70 passengers attempting to connect out of a crush-loaded 153.) The facilities available to connecting passengers are best described as basic. (It only became an interchange in 1966, when the direct Lincoln to Grantham service was cut, and at that time there was still a decent (4tpd) through service so passengers changing at Newark did not become commonplace until the 1980s.
So bad were connections that my father insisted on driving to Newark to pick up or drop off visitors travelling by rail. The improvements to the A46 meant the round trip could easily be done in an hour, even from the wrong side of Lincoln.
A decent through service finally arrived in 2019, just before Dad's 90th birthday. Sadly, the service is no use for us, as he died six months before.

 

[gingerheid]

I don't mind changing a certain number of times... but I often see in these forums the logic that adding a change at D to the journey from C to E isn't a problem, because most people will be able to cope with a change at D.

This is probably true, in respect of people travelling from C to E. However if lots of people are travelling from one of the As or Bs to F then it could be a change too many. I stopped using the ECML from Peterborough to Glasgow bc of the extra change at Edinburgh. It was one change too many in a journey from Cambridge to Ayrshire.

 

[zwk500]

I don't mind changing a certain number of times... but I often see in these forums the logic that adding a change at D to the journey from C to E isn't a problem, because most people will be able to cope with a change at D.

This is probably true, in respect of people travelling from C to E. However if lots of people are travelling from one of the As or Bs to F then it could be a change too many.

You have to carefully consider the relative volumes making each journey of course.

 

[Old Yard Dog]

Changing trains is particularly stressful when you hold Advanced tickets or seat reservations, particuluarly if you have tight connections.

I know tickets are meant to be usable on the next train if you miss a connection (assuming you haven't split tickets) but you still worry about the hassle you might get persuading jobsworth ticket inspectors.

I hardly ever buy advanced tickets because of the stress and contingency time you need to build in.

 

[Andrew*Debbie]

Changing at Crewe and Chester with a suitcase and a carry on is not fun. Doing this after waking up at 3AM to make a 6AM flight, changing planes in Salt Lake, overnight flight in economy, Heathrow Express to Paddington, Taxi to Euston....

I'm too ****ing old for this.

 

[zwk500]

Changing at Crewe and Chester with a suitcase and a carry on is not fun. Doing this after waking up at 3AM to make a 6AM flight, changing planes in Salt Lake, overnight flight in economy, Heathrow Express to Paddington, Taxi to Euston....

I'm too ****ing old for this.

With all due respect, I think you may be in a category of one for that journey.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Changing at Crewe and Chester with a suitcase and a carry on is not fun. Doing this after waking up at 3AM to make a 6AM flight, changing planes in Salt Lake, overnight flight in economy, Heathrow Express to Paddington, Taxi to Euston....

I'm too ****ing old for this.

The Chester-Crewe shuttle is to be fair an utter, utter bodge that exists for entirely political reasons and is a pain for anyone who's ever had anything to do with it. A direct TfW service to Crewe from the Coast would be much, much better, though admittedly there is the Avanti.

The old service pattern of Birmingham via Stafford and a separate Chester to South Wales via the Marches was much, much more practical in terms of aligning to the journeys people actually make.

 

[pmcgurk]

Changing at Crewe and Chester with a suitcase and a carry on is not fun. Doing this after waking up at 3AM to make a 6AM flight, changing planes in Salt Lake, overnight flight in economy, Heathrow Express to Paddington, Taxi to Euston....

I'm too ****ing old for this.

What was your destination? Wondering if CrossCountry via Reading would have made it less painful?

 

[HSTEd]

Equally I can be 15 minutes late to the bus stop and get back on time as a result as well. It works both ways.

Can you?

At best being 15 minutes late to the bus stop means you arrive 15 minutes late, even if you arrive at the same time as the next bus.

 

[Andrew*Debbie]

With all due respect, I think you may be in a category of one for that journey.

I see people with airline luggage tags on the Crewe-Chester shuttle. No idea if they've been through the misery of traveling from a remote part of the American north west without a break. Possibly Chester is their final destination. < shrug >

The last few trips we've booked two hours in the Aerotel so we can shower and change. It used to be a bargain but is now over £250 for two hours. The Plaza Premium arrival lounge is still closed. Has been since the pandemic.

What was your destination? Wondering if CrossCountry via Reading would have made it less painful?

LHR <---> Bangor, North Wales. Llanfairpwll is walking distance from home, but avoid that with luggage since there is no lift.

Thanks for the suggestion. I'll have to check timetables and prices. Maybe we will book a hotel in Reading next time --> LHR --> Reading (sleep) --> Crewe --> Bangor.

 

[ChrisC]

I don’t in general mind changing trains if it is a reasonable connection. I don’t like really tight connections at large busy stations when I have luggage to carry and at the other extreme I don’t like extremely long waits of up to an hour.

Until 3 years ago, when EMR introduced reduced timetables on the Robin Hood Line to only 1tph, I always used to park or get the bus from home to Hucknall station and begin and end my journeys there. These days I remain on the bus all the way into Nottingham or get a bus or drive to Alfreton instead. There are so many destinations which now require a wait of up to an hour in Nottingham for a connection. Remaining on the bus into Nottingham, rather than getting the train from Hucknall, saves a 40 minute wait on the platform at Hucknall and then often another hour in Nottingham. I’d rather be sitting on a bus and getting somewhere than sitting on a cold draughty station.

 

[Dr Hoo]

To give further examples of 'railheading', to avoid changes, long waits, engineering work or other disruption, and also to take advantage of some fare offers it is quite common for people in the Hope Valley (including me) to drive to Chesterfield, Doncaster, Macclesfield and even Stafford to get direct/fast trains to London.

(This is, of course, against a background where we all have to have access to a car to drive to our nearest/local station anyway. The well-known ex-MP and journalist Matthew Parris, who lives near Bakewell, has often referred to his 'station car' in his articles.)

 

[Krokodil]

With all due respect, I think you may be in a category of one for that journey.

The minority on Crewe-Chester shuttles is people going from Crewe to Chester. Almost everyone on those trains has a previous or onward connection - or in many cases both.

The Chester-Crewe shuttle is to be fair an utter, utter bodge that exists for entirely political reasons and is a pain for anyone who's ever had anything to do with it. A direct TfW service to Crewe from the Coast would be much, much better, though admittedly there is the Avanti.

Avanti should be providing an hourly direct service from London to Chester (with some services extended across the border). If/when that gets reinstated it would solve the issue for most passengers because Chester-Euston is one of the most popular tickets I see on those shuttles. The second most popular destination at the Crewe end seems to be Stoke. Combining the shuttle with EMR's Newark Castle service would benefit a lot of passengers, but good luck pathing that across the throat.

 

[Wychwood93]

I see people with airline luggage tags on the Crewe-Chester shuttle. No idea if they've been through the misery of traveling from a remote part of the American north west without a break. Possibly Chester is their final destination. < shrug >

The last few trips we've booked two hours in the Aerotel so we can shower and change. It used to be a bargain but is now over £250 for two hours. The Plaza Premium arrival lounge is still closed. Has been since the pandemic.






LHR <---> Bangor, North Wales. Llanfairpwll is walking distance from home, but avoid that with luggage since there is no lift.

Thanks for the suggestion. I'll have to check timetables and prices. Maybe we will book a hotel in Reading next time --> LHR --> Reading (sleep) --> Crewe --> Bangor.

A friend of ours goes up to Bangor to see her mum a few times a year: XC from Bournemouth to Wolverhampton and then TfW direct to Bangor.

EDIT: Obviously you would pick up the XC at Reading! Same platform at Wolverhampton.

 

[ChrisC]

To give further examples of 'railheading', to avoid changes, long waits, engineering work or other disruption, and also to take advantage of some fare offers it is quite common for people in the Hope Valley (including me) to drive to Chesterfield, Doncaster, Macclesfield and even Stafford to get direct/fast trains to London.

I think the same can be said for many people in the Mansfield area of Nottinghamshire. Getting to London is quite easy with just one change of train at Nottingham but connections at Nottingham or Worksop to other destinations, especially to the north are often very inconvenient and increase journey times to an unacceptable level. Therefore many people use the bus or drive to Nottingham, Alfreton, Chesterfield or Newark. EMR cutting the service to only 1tph between Mansfield and Nottingham hasn’t helped.

 

[3141]

I notice several well-worn clichés creeping in here, the first being in the title's assumption that anyone who's an OAP must be almost incapable of getting out of one train and onto another. It's true that the last time I changed at Clapham Junction for Gatwick was before Covid, and that nowadays I would try to minimise the weight of my suitcase, but I could still do it even if the lift wasn't working, and I've been receiving the state pension for almost 19 years.

Second, we can all think of situations where when we get out of train 1 it's a long wait till train 2 arrives, but I think that problem is often exaggerated. I remember a letter in one magazine which said that none of the trains at Manchester Piccadilly connected with another. As there must be thirty or more arrivals and departures there each hour that's a ridiculous claim. What the writer meant that his particular connection wasn't as quick as he'd like.

Third, on a busy route timetabling a wait for one train to provide a connection from another one not only adds to the length of the journey for those in the first train who aren't changing there, but it may create connection problems further along the line, or congestion because more than one service will be wanting to occupy a section at the same time.

Fourth, and this more difficult, is the question of whether a train should be held so that a connection can be made from a late-running service. Not holding a train inconveniences those wanting to change from the service that's running late. We cannot tell what inconveniences may be caused to passengers on the first train which, if held, will now be late further along its journey, but it's unrealistic to suppose that the only reason for not holding it is to maintain the TOC's on-time arrivals statistics. There must be scope to consider at what times of the day a train should be held, and for how long, and when it shouldn't be held.