RealTimeTrains website

[Poggs]

I am glad the problematic TOCs in question have been dragged kicking and screaming into sharing their allox.

I think you have the wrong view of TOCs. They don't exist solely to provide information for enthusiasts, and some may have an objection to their data going in to RTT at the exclusion of everyone else.

The hate I've seen directed to TOCs who didn't share their data in the past is not pleasant reading and shows up a huge amount of privilege and expectation on the part of certain people.

At least we have a more level playing field now.

 

[Adam Williams]

I think you have the wrong view of TOCs. They don't exist solely to provide information for enthusiasts, and some may have an objection to their data going in to RTT at the exclusion of everyone else.

No, they exist to provide a service to passengers. They also should be providing information to equip retailers to sell tickets on their trains to encourage revenue growth and reduce subsidy.

I do not believe for one minute that the objections were "we don't want this data going only to RTT, we actually want everyone to have it". They wanted to keep it for themselves, otherwise they would've found a way to publish it a long time ago (and if RTT adopts it after that, so what?).

There are other datasets which are also still being hoarded in exactly the same way. Call me cynical if you like, but there is not a level playing field here.

Some of the TOCs that were being difficult with this data have also been incredibly difficult with other (industry) data, and consumers of that data.

I also suspect part of the reasoning for the data staying closed for so long (aside from nonsensical "security" concerns which have been proven to be entirely unfounded) has been the continued characterisation by some that it's only of value "for enthusiasts", which is complete nonsense. Please don't continue to suggest that this is the case; you know as well as I do that there are a great variety of use-cases unlocked by having this data available (which, I will add, is commonplace to make available outside the UK). Retailers can give passengers more accurate on-the-day information about facilities, the on-board experience, the likelihood of getting a seat, hell, the colour of the train.

 

[nesw]

Slightly off topic but TfL also cite security concerns as a reason for not publishing unit numbers. the concerns don’t however, extend to London Underground where a ‘leading car’ number is part of the open data feed.

Manchester Metrolink also use the security issues excuses.

 

[stadler]

That's a reach counting them

Well they do run over Network Rail tracks and infrastructure and accept National Rail tickets over that section. So i would count them as a mainline operator.

I can understand that particular service needing 12 coaches from Euston as it's in the high peak (17:56), but does it really need 12 coaches north of Northampton considering it will restrict the guard to the rear of coach 8 for the multiple stations between Northampton & New Street which will require Unit Deselect due to only taking 8 coaches.

Minor point but it is the front cab of coach 9 that they would be in. Unit Deselect on a Desiro requires you to be in the cab of coach 5 to open the front 4 coaches only or be in the cab of coach 9 to open the front 8 coaches only.

 

[Earle Grey]

No, they exist to provide a service to passengers. They also should be providing information to equip retailers to sell tickets on their trains to encourage revenue growth and reduce subsidy.

Agreed, but in the cases where an operator has only one fleet of trains and the facilities are the same and there trains will either be 3/6 or 4/8 cars... why does anyone need the numbers?

We'll just have to agree that the availability of this data, through a third party such as Real Time Trains, is a unintended benefit to those who collect sticky digits and such like. What would our departed enthusiast friends and acquiesces make of us now.

Slightly off topic but TfL also cite security concerns as a reason for not publishing unit numbers. the concerns don’t however, extend to London Underground where a ‘leading car’ number is part of the open data feed.

Manchester Metrolink also use the security issues excuses.

More of the law of unintended consequences, what is the implication good, bad or indifferent to anyone else knowing, now or in the future; given the reliance on/drive to use IT to connect our lives, shape our thoughts and live our lives inside and outside of work.

 

[Benjwri]

Agreed, but in the cases where an operator has only one fleet of trains and the facilities are the same and there trains will either be 3/6 or 4/8 cars... why does anyone need the numbers?

The TOC that is being referred to in the discussion doesn't, and while the numbers are nice, the type of trains can have a significant effect on a passenger's journey. The information on which of those it is should be widely open to the public.

 

[Robski]

Slightly off topic but TfL also cite security concerns as a reason for not publishing unit numbers. the concerns don’t however, extend to London Underground where a ‘leading car’ number is part of the open data feed.

That is news to me as they have expressed support for the publication of unit numbers - https://raildata.org.uk/dashboard/want/W-28d5c35e-72a9-4ce9-9880-2e0d62295d9e (see comment from TfL).

 

[Jacob Porrett]

Any idea when 153 units with the AT sets will be on rtt? I noticed the other day when I was at shrewsbury they were not on their.

 

[jackdoyle]

Is this true on realtimes trains? 12 cars 350s coming all the way to Birmingham NS?

Realtime Trains | 1Y61 1756 London Euston to Birmingham New Street | 22/09/2025

Real-time train running information for 1Y61 1756 departure from London Euston to Birmingham New Street on 22/09/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

This looks like a similar glitch showing as 16 cars. Looking at the previous services imagine 350106 and 350126 are the correct ones. https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:L35761/2025-09-23/detailed#allox_id=0

 

[liamf656]

This looks like a similar glitch showing as 16 cars. Looking at the previous services imagine 350106 and 350126 are the correct ones. https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:L35761/2025-09-23/detailed#allox_id=0

It's not necessarily a glitch, the two units that aren't working it haven't been taken off the allocation

 

[sufian123]

This looks like a similar glitch showing as 16 cars. Looking at the previous services imagine 350106 and 350126 are the correct ones. https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:L35761/2025-09-23/detailed#allox_id=0

It’s happening again with the same service.

Realtime Trains | 1756 London Euston to Birmingham New Street | 23/09/2025

Real-time train running information for 1756 departure from London Euston to Birmingham New Street on 23/09/2025. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[Adam Williams]

It's not a glitch

 

[Falcon1200]

why does anyone need the numbers?

Because giving the set numbers is a simple way of showing what any train is formed by, both in terms of type and capacity. Anyway, why should such details be secret, given that every single passenger train is in full view to the public!

 

[Peter0124]

Because giving the set numbers is a simple way of showing what any train is formed by, both in terms of type and capacity. Anyway, why should such details be secret, given that every single passenger train is in full view to the public!

Its no different to flightradar telling you plane registrations.

What would be cool is if units reported in as being faulty in some way (eg aircon, plug sockets) were shown to passengers, which you would need the set number for.

 

[Tom]

why does anyone need the numbers?

Arguably, they don’t. I had this very debate with ScotRail nearly 6 years ago. They are however a quick means to an end. We were never initially going to even publish them until we all pretty much agreed “why does this matter?”

I wanted to show class of train and length, as that’s ultimately what I wanted. I also wanted to show facilities on board and that iterated into liveries.

The easiest way to be able to do all of that without creating undue burden on ScotRail was for them to give me numbers and I just do my own mapping.

And then others were interested.

And we are here now where numbers are available. They have other purposes - like tracking units for lost property etc - but really it just makes it quicker for someone to do something cool with. The numbers being out there are ultimately a side product.

 

[Earle Grey]

@Falcon1200 @Tom Thanks for both your selective quoting. I did try explain the reluctance of an operator to get involved given they have only one type of stock and their trains will be either 3/6 or 4/8... and the benefit is seen as marginal for their customers... what we have as enthusiasts is an unintended consequence of this data being available which is the point I quite clearly stated.

The TOC that is being referred to in the discussion doesn't, and while the numbers are nice, the type of trains can have a significant effect on a passenger's journey. The information on which of those it is should be widely open to the public.

I didn't refer to any TOC and wasn't thinking about that one anyway for the reasons given above.

 

[Falcon1200]

Thanks for both your selective quoting.

The selective quote was so that I could respond directly to the question being asked - That seems logical and appropriate to me.

 

[dosxuk]

Its no different to flightradar telling you plane registrations.

If you compare flightradar with the lesser used sites, like adsbexchange, you'll see there's a lot of aircraft missing from flightradar - plenty of people seemingly do have an issue with those registrations being out in public too.

 

[bramling]

Because giving the set numbers is a simple way of showing what any train is formed by, both in terms of type and capacity. Anyway, why should such details be secret, given that every single passenger train is in full view to the public!

Regular passengers, and I don’t mean enthusiasts, certainly have some level of awareness of things like different train types. They may not be particularly interested in what specific number it is, but they certainly notice things like whether a particular type of train is more comfortable, where the first class is, where the bike space is, and also how long a service is going to be.

I browse a few rail user group facebook pages for my local area, and every time a new timetable comes in there’s numerous posts asking which services are formed of which types of train, which peak services are the longest trains, etc.

The only potential security argument I can see for withholding specific numbers is that numbers do potentially allow a given train to be tracked around the system, which I guess could be useful to those with nefarious intent. But, in reality, how much of an issue really is this? If the local youths want to tag a train, word would still get round that X train sits in Y siding for 15 minutes at whatever time. Should the very many people who wish to make constructive use of this sort of information be prevented from doing so because of a small number of people with ill intentions?

 

[zwk500]

Regular passengers, and I don’t mean enthusiasts, certainly have some level of awareness of things like different train types. They may not be particularly interested in what specific number it is, but they certainly notice things like whether a particular type of train is more comfortable, where the first class is, where the bike space is, and also how long a service is going to be.

I browse a few rail user group facebook pages for my local area, and every time a new timetable comes in there’s numerous posts asking which services are formed of which types of train, which peak services are the longest trains, etc.

As Tom explained above, having specific numbers is primarily the means to the end about more general information. Once you have specific numbers then you can do a bit more than you might have anyway.

The only potential security argument I can see for withholding specific numbers is that numbers do potentially allow a given train to be tracked around the system, which I guess could be useful to those with nefarious intent. But, in reality, how much of an issue really is this? If the local youths want to tag a train, word would still get round that X train sits in Y siding for 15 minutes at whatever time. Should the very many people who wish to make constructive use of this sort of information be prevented from doing so because of a small number of people with ill intentions?

The test for this should be very easy, because you just have to look at TOCs that have been on KYT and see if they've had a corresponding increase in adverse incidents related to being more visible.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

The test for this should be very easy, because you just have to look at TOCs that have been on KYT and see if they've had a corresponding increase in adverse incidents related to being more visible.

There should also be a test for the converse - has their staff productivity increased as a result of them not being bothered any more by people like us asking for information on what is working where...?

I don't think there's been any security trouble as a result of KYT - if there had been, there would have been a withdrawal from the system by any affected operator and a statement from them saying why. It's been around long enough now that any trouble like that would have shown up a long time ago.

 

[talldave]

I see that realtimetrains.co.uk is now wasting valuable screen space with an extra line for "SWR Arterio" for every one of these trains. Pointless .

 

[43096]

I see that realtimetrains.co.uk is now wasting valuable screen space with an extra line for "SWR Arterio" for every one of these trains. Pointless .

If you are looking at the “simple” view, it isn’t an extra line. It either shows, for example “South Western Railway - 8 coaches” or “SWR Arterio - 10 coaches” so is actually using less screen space.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I see that realtimetrains.co.uk is now wasting valuable screen space with an extra line for "SWR Arterio" for every one of these trains. Pointless .

Look, I get frustrated with those that rush to jump to RTTs defence for every single criticism, don’t get me wrong - but I don’t see the problem here.



(Image shows a list of departures from Wimbledon)

I can’t see that it takes up any space, rather I think its useful as you can immediately spot which trains have amenities such as USB chargers, air conditioning/heating, realtime information, etc.

And I suppose the 455 cranks can better distinguish which trains are still operated by those awful old things now too

 

[WWTownEnth]

Look, I get frustrated with those that rush to jump to RTTs defence for every single criticism, don’t get me wrong - but I don’t see the problem here.

View attachment 189348

(Image shows a list of departures from Wimbledon)

I can’t see that it takes up any space, rather I think its useful as you can immediately spot which trains have amenities such as USB chargers, air conditioning/heating, realtime information, etc.

And I suppose the 455 cranks can better distinguish which trains are still operated by those awful old things now too

Look, I get frustrated with those that rush to jump to RTTs defence for every single criticism, don’t get me wrong - but I don’t see the problem here.

View attachment 189348

(Image shows a list of departures from Wimbledon)

I can’t see that it takes up any space, rather I think its useful as you can immediately spot which trains have amenities such as USB chargers, air conditioning/heating, realtime information, etc.

And I suppose the 455 cranks can better distinguish which trains are still operated by those awful old things now too

I must say I find this rather useful.

 

[Goldfish62]

I see that realtimetrains.co.uk is now wasting valuable screen space with an extra line for "SWR Arterio" for every one of these trains. Pointless .

I've just checked on my phone and it's actually using less space than before, not more!

But I suggest you complain to RTT if you don't like it.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I must say I find this rather useful.

So do I.

 

[Class15]

I’m not a fan of this. The ‘TOC’ label should stick to TOCs, and abbreviations like ‘SWR Arterio’ are just likely to confuse ‘normals’ who don’t know what that is.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

I’m not a fan of this. The ‘TOC’ label should stick to TOCs, and abbreviations like ‘SWR Arterio’ are just likely to confuse ‘normals’ who don’t know what that is.

Tell that to ATOS Worldline

 

[PGAT]

I’m not a fan of this. The ‘TOC’ label should stick to TOCs, and abbreviations like ‘SWR Arterio’ are just likely to confuse ‘normals’ who don’t know what that is.

Confuse it with what?