Displaying the class of service

[U-Bahnfreund]

I think Britain should introduce service categories. I always find it very confusing if you don’t know whether it’s a fast or stopping train. And by the way, not only ‘Germanic’ countries have this, actually, almost every country in Continental Europe uses service categories, regardless of which tickets can be used or who subsidies the trains. The Netherlands have two general categories: IC (or Sneltrein if private) for express trains and Sprinter (Stoptrein if private) trains for stopping trains. In addition, the IC Direct trains on the high-speed line, the ICE to Germany and the Thalys to Belgium and France are differentiated. In Belgium, you have the high-speed trains, Intercity and L (= train locale or lokaale trein) trains. In the Czech Republic, trains are divided into the Os, Sp, R, Ex, EC, EN, RJ and SC categories, and so on and so forth.

Germany, by the way, is not as simple as it seems, there are many quirks in the system, so Britian should keep it as simple as possible.

I’d recommed something like
* Local trains, stopping everywhere
* Local trains, only stopping at some stations
* Intercity services
* High-speed services

 

[Bletchleyite]

There are other ways, of course, of knowing if it's the fast or slow train. Some stations (Euston was first) show arrival times against stations on the departure display. This is very useful for making an educated decision.

 

[sheff1]

Some stations ... show arrival times against stations on the departure display. This is very useful for making an educated decision.

Indeed. If display of this info was rolled out nationally then, coupled with accurate description of on board catering and first class facilities, it would remove any (perceived) need to display the train "classification".

 

[AlterEgo]

There are other ways, of course, of knowing if it's the fast or slow train. Some stations (Euston was first) show arrival times against stations on the departure display. This is very useful for making an educated decision.

King's Cross also does this and it is simple but very useful.

 

[coppercapped]

Journey planners show clearly the difference between trains with more and fewer stops. They will also list all the stops made by the trains and the user can choose that only faster journeys are indicated.

Platform displays, in the UK, list all the stops the train will make whereas departure boards in Germany for long distance trains will typically show the first stop, then the next major interchange and then the destination - regardless of where else the train calls. In these circumstances the train type will be useful as it gives a clue as to how many stations the train will serve on its journey.

Most stopping trains in the UK do not run the whole length of a route - no local train from Paddington goes past Didcot on the Bristol route so nobody will ever find themselves on a stopping train to Bristol. By default trains to Swindon make at the most two stops - there are no stopping trains. Similarly on the West Coast no stopping train from London goes to Manchester and on the East Coast no 'stopper' goes past Peterborough and there are very few long distance trains which stop between London and Peterborough. The other radial routes from London are shorter, as are most lateral routes, so the difference in time between a 'faster' service and a 'slower' service is less and correspondingly less important. The odd one out is Cross Country - but this essentially runs an interurban service, there being no 'limited stop' trains on its routes.

There are some places where misidentification of the train type can double the length of the journey, for example my local service from Paddington. A fast train takes 25mins, a slow train double that. But if one can't see the list of calling points on the display at the entrance to the platform or understand its significance probably means one shouldn't be let out unaccompanied! Adding an additional train classification will only mean that is also ignored.

The smaller time penalty of misidentifying a train compared to that incurred on typical continental services with hourly frequencies at best (with the exception of short distance operators like Belgium and the Netherlands) and that differences in service patterns make it difficult to see the need to categorise trains by type - the requirement for the identification of journey time and stations served are met by other means.

 

[Carlisle]

It would also avoid the misleading nonsense of showing Oxford stoppers as Radley at Padd.

Thats been going on for many decades and will probably never change , in the early 1980s for instance nothing from Victoria except GX called at Gatwick and Southampton to Bournemouth stoppers were all terminating at Pokesdown

 

[glbotu]

Thats been going on for many decades and will probably never change , in the early 1980s for instance nothing from Victoria except GX called at Gatwick and Southampton to Bournemouth stoppers were all terminating at Pokesdown

Well, you say that, but some TOCs have taken the initiative to change. GTR stopped calling Cambridge Stoppers "Foxton" trains (and "Finsbury Park" on the Up service), preferring to say "stopping service" and others have done the same (a few references up thread).

While classifying services seems nice (and definitely more than a little in the Rail Enthusiasts' love of order), it's important to implement a solution that is better than what we have, rather than adding more information. This classification stuff makes sense to us, because we spend our spare time on a rail forum and therefore understand what classifications would mean, but information overload is a real problem that is thought about when designing PIS displays.

The two things I could see as more useful, which could be borrowed from mainland Europe, would be

a) Displaying the "Customer Service Number" more prominently for those with advance tickets (XC show it on Voyagers - it's usually TOC code + 4 digits, like XC2345).

b) Creating more "S-Bahnen" around major city regions, with consistent fixed routes at higher frequencies (within reason), reducing the number of hourly service patterns, to improve convenience for passengers (both GM and WY would be particularly beneficial for this).

But that's for another thread........

 

[Bletchleyite]

Thats been going on for many decades and will probably never change , in the early 1980s for instance nothing from Victoria except GX called at Gatwick and Southampton to Bournemouth stoppers were all terminating at Pokesdown

Poole-Waterloo stoppers are shown as Farnborough from west of Bournemouth, which I find rather confusing and unnecessary.

 

[Bletchleyite]

a) Displaying the "Customer Service Number" more prominently for those with advance tickets (XC show it on Voyagers - it's usually TOC code + 4 digits, like XC2345).

Agreed - people can understand the idea of "flight numbers" and it would reduce confusion. Mostly, anyway...I do know regulars on a particular sleasyJet flight (EZY 2051 LTN-GVA) used to know it as "the twenty fifty one" but it departed at around 0700. So it might actually make sense to choose numbering such that it *cannot* represent a clock time - i.e. where you end up with 4 digits ensure one digit in position 1 or 3 is too large for it to be a valid clock time.

b) Creating more "S-Bahnen" around major city regions, with consistent fixed routes at higher frequencies (within reason), reducing the number of hourly service patterns, to improve convenience for passengers (both GM and WY would be particularly beneficial for this).

With you on that. I also think the Swiss rural S-Bahn service concept is worthy of consideration - would, for example, fit North Wales very well.

 

[3141]

I can't think of a station, terminal or intermediate, where the information about where trains are going to call isn't displayed. The only problem is where a large display lists all destinations and shows the time of the next train to each one, but doesn't necessarily say whether it's fast or slow.

But if we had the suggested classifications, particularly if they include both ICE and IC, many people would not know what they meant, and I doubt that they'd be found to be particularly useful.

Classifications would produce some interesting anomalies. SWT's trains to Exeter call only at Clapham Junction, Woking, Basingstoke and Andover on their way to Salisbury (83 miles), but over the next 100 miles they call at all stations. They become stoppers. In the rush hours, every train also calls at Overton, Whitchurch and Grateley, so they become stoppers after Basingstoke. There must be many similar examples. Would the classification change en route?

 

[glbotu]

I can't think of a station, terminal or intermediate, where the information about where trains are going to call isn't displayed. The only problem is where a large display lists all destinations and shows the time of the next train to each one, but doesn't necessarily say whether it's fast or slow.

But if we had the suggested classifications, particularly if they include both ICE and IC, many people would not know what they meant, and I doubt that they'd be found to be particularly useful.

Classifications would produce some interesting anomalies. SWT's trains to Exeter call only at Clapham Junction, Woking, Basingstoke and Andover on their way to Salisbury (83 miles), but over the next 100 miles they call at all stations. They become stoppers. In the rush hours, every train also calls at Overton, Whitchurch and Grateley, so they become stoppers after Basingstoke. There must be many similar examples. Would the classification change en route?

I think you'd classify it as an RE (along with a lot of services that do a similar thing). Realistically, you'd probably classify EC, GW IC, MML and WC services as ICE (yes, the E is appropriate, by all classification systems, services that travel regularly over 124mph as classified as express). XC ML services would probably get IC, as would TPE on the North and North West routes, once they've replaced the 185s and 350s with the 800s and 397s. XC's "local" services would probably be R, TPE South and the "semi-fasts" would be RE as would the new "Northern Connect" services.

But again, with the differences in method of operation, you're only really using this to denote the type of train/service. That's why we have announcements and PIS displays to give us stopping patterns. In countries with this system, they tend to only display major stops. So, you'd have something like

10:30 Exeter RE Clapham Jn, Woking, Basingstoke, Salisbury, Yeovil
11:00 Exeter R Clapham Jn, Woking, Basingstoke, Salisbury, Yeovil

And as a user, you'd know which one stopped at Andover based on whether it was displayed R or RE.

 

[3141]

As a regular user of the service, I'd know which one stopped at Andover either because I knew that the trains leaving on the hour stopped there, or because I'd looked at the list of the places the train called at. These are fully satisfactory means of obtaining the information I need.

I'm sure that if classifications were introduced those who travel regularly would get to know what stations a train called R stopped at, but only for their particular route. For routes they didn't regularly use, they'd still have to check the displays or listen to the announcements - as would passengers who weren't regular users.

My view is that passengers are helped by the most direct access to essential information such as whether a train will call at the station they want. Inserting an extra step such as a classification code makes accessing the information more complex, and if they are not totally familiar with the route and the calling pattern of the different classifications they will still have to check the list of calling points.

 

[Kite159]

Some stations (Clapham Junction) have "next fastest to" boards which highlights what the fastest service is to (say) Basingstoke, which might not be the next departure [for example 23:35 Waterloo - Southampton on a Saturday night is normally overtaken on route by the 23:40 Salisbury due to the Southampton calling at Farnborough & Fleet, meaning that regular passengers will crowd the 159 to get back to Basingstoke a few minutes earlier.

Whereas some stations (East Croydon) have next departure boards, which is fine and dandy apart from it doesn't say that the next departure to (i.e.) London Bridge is an all station stopper and any passengers wanting London Bridge should board the train behind it to arrive 10 minutes earlier.

 

[cf111]

King's Cross also does this and it is simple but very useful.

As does Edinburgh Waverley, useful indeed when there are different routes to Glasgow and Perth for instance.

They have also started displaying "ready soon" when a long-distance train is close to having its platform displayed which I've only seen at King's Cross and Euston before.

 

[glbotu]

Some stations (Clapham Junction) have "next fastest to" boards which highlights what the fastest service is to (say) Basingstoke, which might not be the next departure [for example 23:35 Waterloo - Southampton on a Saturday night is normally overtaken on route by the 23:40 Salisbury due to the Southampton calling at Farnborough & Fleet, meaning that regular passengers will crowd the 159 to get back to Basingstoke a few minutes earlier.

Whereas some stations (East Croydon) have next departure boards, which is fine and dandy apart from it doesn't say that the next departure to (i.e.) London Bridge is an all station stopper and any passengers wanting London Bridge should board the train behind it to arrive 10 minutes earlier.

I'd posit that in the "East Croydon" situation, it's a crowd control issue. They don't want all the passengers waiting at what can be a very crowded station. They'd rather they got on the stopper to clear the platforms. But yeah, "next fastest to" boards are useful, alongside traditional departure boards (as opposed to Manchester Piccadilly, which had it instead of that).

 

[Chris M]

Classifications would produce some interesting anomalies. SWT's trains to Exeter call only at Clapham Junction, Woking, Basingstoke and Andover on their way to Salisbury (83 miles), but over the next 100 miles they call at all stations. They become stoppers. In the rush hours, every train also calls at Overton, Whitchurch and Grateley, so they become stoppers after Basingstoke. There must be many similar examples. Would the classification change en route?

As another example of this, there are occasions when an XC train from Exeter (or even Plymouth) to somewhere beyond Birmingham, obviously principally a national intercity express service, has been a semi-fast local train between Western-super-Mare and Bristol (calling at least at Yatton and Nailsea and Backwell, possibly also Worle). It also is (or was) very common for FGW expresses between Paddington and Weston-super-Mare to call at these three local stations.

Some stations (Clapham Junction) have "next fastest to" boards which highlights what the fastest service is to (say) Basingstoke, which might not be the next departure [for example 23:35 Waterloo - Southampton on a Saturday night is normally overtaken on route by the 23:40 Salisbury due to the Southampton calling at Farnborough & Fleet, meaning that regular passengers will crowd the 159 to get back to Basingstoke a few minutes earlier.

The problem with those boards at Paddington is that they can say the next fastest train to Oxford departs in 45 minutes, when they actually mean the next fastest direct train departs then but the quickest way to Oxford is take the next fast train to Reading or Didcot and change there.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The vast majority of people prefer not to change to save 5 minutes, so that is probably sensible, though programming in a common change wouldn't be too hard.

 

[Chris M]

The last time I did this, the change saved me about 30 minutes, but yes if I was travelling with lots of luggage I may prefer direct. The obvious answer to this is to title the display "next fastest direct train to" and have an a symbol or something to indicate that there is an indirect journey that will get you there quicker. Maybe a series of symbols * = change at Reading, # = change at Didcot, + = change at Swindon, etc in a key below.

Alternatively just have two lines one with the direct train, and other with the indirect.

 

[CC 72100]

As another example of this, there are occasions when an XC train from Exeter (or even Plymouth) to somewhere beyond Birmingham, obviously principally a national intercity express service, has been a semi-fast local train between Western-super-Mare and Bristol (calling at least at Yatton and Nailsea and Backwell, possibly also Worle). .

Very rare - nothing timetabled and only in extreme service disruption.

 

[LAX54]

Not really.

When privatisation first happened then maybe. Generally the stopping train and the express train were run by different companies. If you got the Anglia or Great Western train you knew you were getting an Intercity service and if you got the Great Eastern or Thames Turbo train you were getting the commuter train. But now it's one TOC that run both in most cases.

I know my train from, say, Plymouth to Bristol is operated by First Great Western. Depending on what time of day it is, it could be a HST or it could be a class 150. There's no real way of knowing, unless you delve into the timetable to see if it has a 1 and a picture of a teacup. And even that doesn't always work: there's basically nothing to highlight that if you get the 1700 London-Norwich train it's an intercity train with a buffet car and if you get the 1702 London-Norwich train it, well, isn't.

Telling passengers what style of service it is doesn't mean you get rid of TOCs or their branding.

so you are saying there should be a premium paid on top of the normal fare to catch the 1700 from Liverpool Street, and the 'normal' fare for the 1702 ?
which would be the European way that you would like ?

 

[LAX54]

Or if you look at the departure board, which often does have information about the onboard amenities ("First Class Accommodation is at the front", "Buffet Car", "Trolley Service" are all examples of things that are actually on the information screens). Or, on the only booking engine, also look for the symbols. It's much more meaningful to give this kind of information than it is to use a cryptic name like "Intercity Express", which doesn't really tell you anything and, even if it did, would just be more jargon.

Norwich - London - Norwich used to be branded at 'Inter-City Shuttle'

 

[jon0844]

I do think charging for type of service could be a better way to do things, allowing slower trains to be cheaper.

We do have this to a degree with Virgin and LM for fares to Birmingham. I opted to go LM to save a small fortune. This could be done not by TOC-specific fares but train type, and then be easier for Joe Public to understand.

The question then would be, could you use your more expensive Intercity train on any 'class' below it or would you be restricted, and could you excess the ticket etc.

 

[Chris M]

Very rare - nothing timetabled and only in extreme service disruption.

OK, it was several years ago now but I personally experienced it three times. Once when the FGW (class 150 iirc) left people behind, once when the preceding FGW was cancelled (both extra stops added) and once it was planned (I presume engineering works, but I don't remember for certain). All three were northbound.

I wasn't a regular traveller, let alone a commuter, so it seems probable to me that happened more often that but obviously it's not impossible that by chance I saw the only three times it did.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I do think charging for type of service could be a better way to do things, allowing slower trains to be cheaper.

We do have this to a degree with Virgin and LM for fares to Birmingham. I opted to go LM to save a small fortune. This could be done not by TOC-specific fares but train type, and then be easier for Joe Public to understand.

I think TOC-specific is quite easy to understand. Indeed, some people don't realise you *can* use tickets on multiple TOCs.

 

[tbtc]

Some stations (Clapham Junction) have "next fastest to" boards which highlights what the fastest service is to (say) Basingstoke, which might not be the next departure [for example 23:35 Waterloo - Southampton on a Saturday night is normally overtaken on route by the 23:40 Salisbury due to the Southampton calling at Farnborough & Fleet, meaning that regular passengers will crowd the 159 to get back to Basingstoke a few minutes earlier.

Whereas some stations (East Croydon) have next departure boards, which is fine and dandy apart from it doesn't say that the next departure to (i.e.) London Bridge is an all station stopper and any passengers wanting London Bridge should board the train behind it to arrive 10 minutes earlier.

I can't think of a station, terminal or intermediate, where the information about where trains are going to call isn't displayed. The only problem is where a large display lists all destinations and shows the time of the next train to each one, but doesn't necessarily say whether it's fast or slow.

But if we had the suggested classifications, particularly if they include both ICE and IC, many people would not know what they meant, and I doubt that they'd be found to be particularly useful.

Classifications would produce some interesting anomalies. SWT's trains to Exeter call only at Clapham Junction, Woking, Basingstoke and Andover on their way to Salisbury (83 miles), but over the next 100 miles they call at all stations. They become stoppers. In the rush hours, every train also calls at Overton, Whitchurch and Grateley, so they become stoppers after Basingstoke. There must be many similar examples. Would the classification change en route?

Good points.

I can certainly sympathise with the sentiments on this thread. The problem is that a lot of enthusiasts see the world in very black/white terms and that we aren't starting from scratch (so the idea of copying what the perfect Germans/ Swiss etc do isn't wholly relevant).

For example, the Transpennine "express' is certainly express from Liverpool to Leeds. Bur north of York, it becomes the "stopper" (Thirsk, Northallerton, Darlington, Durham, Chester le Street). It isn't the "semi fast" on any stretch - it goes from being the fastest train west of Leeds to being the slowest train north of York.

So, for those who want to clearly categorise trains, which pigeonhole do you put TPE in? Or do you cut the service in Yorkshire because it doesn't nearly fit into the binary categories that you want a neat ordered railway to comply with?

What about services that have some irregular stops? For example, theres a fairly clear split on Sheffield - Leeds services.

• One fast service per hour (XC - around 60mph as the crow flies).
• Two semi fast services per hour (Northern via Barnsley - around 40mph as the crow flies).
• Two slow services per hour (Northern via Castleford/ Moorthorpe - even a crow with a badly damaged wing could overtake them).

But if you colour code your services, what about when the "semi fast" service becomes semi slower (e.g. stopping at Normanton). Does that make it a slow service? What about when the Moorthorpe stopper runs non stop north of Moorthorpe (late at night - for engineering/ diversion/ avoiding the Wakefield drunks)? The "semi fast" north of Sheffield is the slowest service south of Sheffield (stopping at Dronfield and Langley Mill, plus presumably Ikleston - unlike EMT).

What about EMT services from Sheffield to Leeds? It's pretty slow going via Doncaster (but they are obviously the express service for stations down the MML).

What about interworking? e.g. at the moment an Inverness - Glasgow 170 can be utilised on the next service from Queen Street to Anniesland. Lose all that flexibility for the sake of having a neat ordered railway where a particular colour of train can only operate a particular type of route?

There's some good intention on this thread, but I think that most of it is impractical on the messy interworked railway that we have.

What I would like to see would be better use of the "next FAST service to..." boards at busy stations. For example, arriving in Leeds last night (from another West Yorkshire station) I could see three "Sheffield" services leaving in the next quarter of an hour (on the big screen). But they were all taking different routes, different journey times, so I'd have to go to the relevant platforms to work out the best option. Fair enough if you are an enthusiast who remembers timetables and/or has RTT on their phone, but confusing to a member of the public who sees there's a "Sheffield" service leaving in five minutes but doesn't appreciate that it'll get overtaken en route.

 

[U-Bahnfreund]

In Germany, regional fast trains that become slow trains were designated as "Stadt-Express" (SE). One example was the SE from Cologne to Trier, which is fast from Cologne to Kall (where most of the stopping services from Cologne terminate), but calls everywhere between Kall and Trier. Sadly, this label was dropped a few years ago, and these trains are now RE from Cologne to Gerolstein and RB from Gerolstein to Trier.

As an example for how different services work out, maybe you’d like to take a look at some train services maps:
http://busse-und-bahnen.nrw.de/file...ng/ITF_SPNV/Regionalverkehrsplan_NRW_2017.pdf North Rhine-Westphalia with three categories (S - suburban, RB - stopping, RE - regional fast)
https://www.mavcsoport.hu/sites/default/files/budapest_2017_a3_2016-11-23.pdf Budapest region with four categories (S - stopping, G - semi-fast, Z - semi-express, X - express)
In both cases, all trains shown can be used with the same ticket, only long-distance trains (shown on the NRW map as FV at stations and as small red lines on the Budapest map) need a supplementary fare or another type of ticket.

 

[urbophile]

The only reason giving this sort of information is complicated is because in our crazily privatised system they have to tell us which company is running it. If we had a unified system, or indeed if we had a simple fares structure which didn't restrict journeys to some companies only, we wouldn't need that information. In Italy they have Frecce (fast intercity, some on dedicated tracks) for which you need advance booking and reservation; Intercity (for which these are advised but not I think compulsory, though I stand to be corrected); Regionale Veloce; and Regionale. Self-explanatory and easily remembered.

 

[coppercapped]

The only reason giving this sort of information is complicated is because in our crazily privatised system they have to tell us which company is running it. If we had a unified system, or indeed if we had a simple fares structure which didn't restrict journeys to some companies only, we wouldn't need that information. In Italy they have Frecce (fast intercity, some on dedicated tracks) for which you need advance booking and reservation; Intercity (for which these are advised but not I think compulsory, though I stand to be corrected); Regionale Veloce; and Regionale. Self-explanatory and easily remembered.

This I really don't understand.

In the UK case you have to mentally map the operating company's name to the type of service.

In the Italian case you have to mentally map the train type name to the type of service.

What's the difference?

 

[glbotu]

The only reason giving this sort of information is complicated is because in our crazily privatised system they have to tell us which company is running it. If we had a unified system, or indeed if we had a simple fares structure which didn't restrict journeys to some companies only, we wouldn't need that information. In Italy they have Frecce (fast intercity, some on dedicated tracks) for which you need advance booking and reservation; Intercity (for which these are advised but not I think compulsory, though I stand to be corrected); Regionale Veloce; and Regionale. Self-explanatory and easily remembered.

But in the UK you never need advance booking and reservation. The problems that arise here arise because the same company runs two different types of service but doesn't distinguish between them except for announcing calling patterns (which isn't done in other countries). Northern Connect may be changing that, but that's still just going to be in a "general" way, rather than looking at specific services. A quick look at a destination board doesn't tell you everything you need to know, you need to look at the detailed PIS displays or listen to announcements to ensure you get the correct service.

Something which hasn't been brought up yet is the fact that when classifying routes, they are also NUMBERED. It's very useful to know that R1 always goes to a certain place via certain stops. That could certainly be beneficial and while this information comes up internally quite frequently, it isn't shown on any PIS. Being able to distinguish between NT33 to Sheffield v. Hallam Line to Sheffield (from Leeds) would be useful, because you'd know one of them was a Regional service and one's a Local service.