I hesitate to post such a trivial topic but I found this map truly bizarre. Why would anyone need a map of routes served by Turbo trains? I doubt many passengers would recognise them and it’s not like you’d plan your route to enable you to take what is a pretty hum drum train. To the average passenger the map is pretty misleading and could be taken to imply there’s a limited service between, say, Exeter and Plymouth.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Bizarre GWR map
- Thread starter williamn
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
DelW
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2015
- Messages
- 5,935
Possibly it's a map that is only displayed on board the Turbo fleet, so the service that the train is operating will always be on a section highlighted on the map. It would also emphasise that a passenger would need to change if heading beyond the thick line section. I agree that it's a fairly unusual presentation though.
There is a comparable IET one - I see the logic of what they’ve done, but it all too easily conveys the wrong impression to someone less than familiar with the railways out west.
Dr Hoo
Established Member
Surely this is just like the Victoria Line trains, showing a line diagram of just the line?
Similarly Elizabeth Line trains not showing the entire ‘TfL’ system.
It’s being described in terms a bit like Christopher Columbus being told he’d fall off the edge of the world, whereas in fact other GWR routes are indicated, albeit ‘not all stations shown’.
What sort of ‘wrong impression’ is that? Should Merseyrail EMUs have maps showing everything including ScotRail?
Similarly Elizabeth Line trains not showing the entire ‘TfL’ system.
It’s being described in terms a bit like Christopher Columbus being told he’d fall off the edge of the world, whereas in fact other GWR routes are indicated, albeit ‘not all stations shown’.
What sort of ‘wrong impression’ is that? Should Merseyrail EMUs have maps showing everything including ScotRail?
Yes and no. Those are clearly route diagrams. The GW ones look at a quick glance like a network map. What’s odd is that it’s by “type of train” not “type of service”. What does it matter to the general public whether 6 of the days 20 services are a 165 or 166 or whether it’s 7?
People might care about the different level of service offered on different rolling stock? Cycling provision comes to mind, where IETs have limited spaces that need reservations, whereas Turbos if you can get on with your bike in the doorway you’re fine?
Mainline421
Member
The other way round, yes. 0704 off Bath on weekdays.
Thanks, I’ve only ever been that way on a diversion.
That would be fine if there was any degree of consistency or predictability. GWR don’t quite operate the “random unit generator” that Northern used to love but on various routes there are at least 3 very different kind of train that could turn up (that’s assuming that you consider all turbos to be equal, which for this purpose they probably are.)
tram21
Established Member
Yeah to be fair unlike other operators, your train type does actually matter more on GWR.
It's a slightly odd map, but I can see why they've done it.
contrex
Established Member
There used to be a service the other way, I seem to remember?
Jim the Jim
Member
I would guess that's the intention: it's saying, "if you're on this train, your route will be somewhere on this map". But to my mind this makes more sense on an Underground service where the train is probably stopping at most of the stations on the diagram, than in a case like this where any given service only covers a small part of the map.
Yes - it used to run in the afternoon until a timetable change somewhere around COVID.
They frequently used to delay the 16.22 ex-Bristol, presumably while they cleared it, meaning I missed my bus!
It was originally a product of the move of MOD procurement from Bath to Filton - though of course services had run that way in the past.
Last edited:
norbitonflyer
Established Member
Certainly was - i used it back in 2019. About 4pm, I seem to recall.
contrex
Established Member
I found a service at 1554 from Parkway, getting to Bath at 1622 in the Summer 2018 GWR timetable. GWR timetable archive 2016 - 2019 at https://www.dpsimulation.org.uk/great-western-railway-timetables.html
Aren't these specifically the replacement bus routes for branch lines closed after Beeching? Plus Exeter airport and the recently extended route from Kingsbridge to Salcombe.
DelW
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2015
- Messages
- 5,935
I think they're routes with through tickets available, and times shown in the NR journey planner. (That's certainly the case for Minehead and Bude). That may because they're route replacements as you stated as well of course.
Class 466
Established Member
The average user would think that this implies there are less than 6 trains per day between Newton Abbott & Plymouth. Laughably abysmal piece of cartography
trainmania100
Established Member
Okehampton is mostly 150 so I'm not sure why that is seen as a regular turbo served route. If I was a customer and saw that map, unfamiliar with train types, id therefore assume falsely that my okehampton train was a turbo...
True 165/166 do occasionally go to Okehampton, but predominantly it's 150 operated. The so in the context of the OP, yes I'd consider it misleading with regards to showing "turbo operated routes".
That aside, the rest of the map is ok but again, silly that Cornwall is in a less emboldened line almost makes it look not part of GWR unless you read the print.
It does say May 2022 on it so I'm happy to be corrected, I remember some sort of unit shift around , but the many times I've been to Okehampton, 166 operated services have not been particularly frequent .......
True 165/166 do occasionally go to Okehampton, but predominantly it's 150 operated. The so in the context of the OP, yes I'd consider it misleading with regards to showing "turbo operated routes".
That aside, the rest of the map is ok but again, silly that Cornwall is in a less emboldened line almost makes it look not part of GWR unless you read the print.
It does say May 2022 on it so I'm happy to be corrected, I remember some sort of unit shift around , but the many times I've been to Okehampton, 166 operated services have not been particularly frequent .......
Quite honestly, I think it's stupid.
They should stick rigidly to providing only and all the information that 99% of passengers understand/need.
If we're talking about important minority information like cycle accommodation then the map should indicate that, not give half a clue, requiring additional interpretation, by using just the word "Turbo".
They should stick rigidly to providing only and all the information that 99% of passengers understand/need.
If we're talking about important minority information like cycle accommodation then the map should indicate that, not give half a clue, requiring additional interpretation, by using just the word "Turbo".
Merle Haggard
Established Member
Around here the Beeching closure replacement buses (for example 409 Northampton - Peterborough and 428 Bedford - Cambridge) disappeared when BR stopped subsidising them, which was a very long time ago.
Might be a selection, it’s not all of them. Padstow for example is not on there.
It doesn't include bus services for non-turbo served stations. Which sort of makes sense if you think this map makes sense!
The idea of a ‘Turbo’ rail network map probably made more sense when they were exclusively based in the London Thames Valley to highlight the wider local and commuter services. It’s less good sharing this map when they share the routes with other traction.
Ashley Hill
Established Member
I’m don’t think one has been to Axminster yet.