Displaying the class of service

[absolutelymilk]

The New Statesman have an interesting article
http://www.citymetric.com/transport/britains-departure-boards-should-tell-us-less-about-train-operating-companies-and-more

saying that Britain should copy Germany, where the departure boards tell you what class of service you are getting on:

ICE, or Intercity-Express, offers high-speed travel, stopping only at key cities and interchange hubs. IC – InterCity – offers a long-distance, quite-fast way of travelling, stopping at a few more provincial cities, regional centres, and large towns. Regional-Express (RE) is a, you guessed it, more regional service, stopping more often but still offering a faster service that won’t stop at every piddly village’s sad excuse for a station. That’s what the Regionalbahn (RB) is for.

Has this been considered for the UK?

 

[Bantamzen]

Could be an interesting one, so for example:

VTWC / VTEC is now IC - Intercity, generally long enough to accommodate most passengers with a seat, high speed operations (providing the OLE is up)

Cross Country is now RG - Regional service, way too few carriages so you'll probably end up sitting next to the (probably broken) loos

TPE is now RGE - As the above, but sitting next to the loo will be an luxury with even less capacity available

Northern is now XXX - Local commuter services, if you are lucky a Pacer won't show up with more people per square metre than a Mini on a university campus

 

[me123]

The problem here is that we don't have classes of service in the UK. There is no differentiation between "Intercity" and "Regional" trains. In Europe, passengers will often have to pay different fares to get on different types of service (the ICE may come as a surcharge, for example).

In the UK, your ticket will allow you on any permitted service between two points. That means, if you're going between Birmingham and London (for example) then you can board the Virgin "express" train but you can also board the London Midland or Chiltern "Local" trains. There is generally no differentiation between different services - the same "Any Permitted" ticket covers all of the above. Where the differentiation does exist, it is usually specific to the TOC. To go back to the London-Birmingham example, in addition to the "Any Permitted" fares, there are a selection of TOC specific fares. Route "London Midland Only" informs the passenger exactly which trains they can and cannot take.

This is exactly why the TOC is displayed on the board - and it's why passengers need the information. Introducing things like "Express Train" is completely useless information, unless we were to fundamentally change the entire set up of the railways. And that's exactly what the author of the article is getting at. It isn't really about displaying the type of service, it's quite a poor attempt at arguing for renationalisation.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Introducing things like "Express Train" is completely useless information, unless we were to fundamentally change the entire set up of the railways. And that's exactly what the author of the article is getting at.

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.

 

[me123]

Well I suppose it's fair enough that you may want to differentiate between a 150 and an HST for some routes like that (I hadn't thought of the situation in the SW where that obviously can and does happen), but for every person who wants this information there'll be someone else claiming that it's superfluous. At the end of the day, the journey costs the same regardless of whether you're on a pacer or a pendo. It perhaps wouldn't be unreasonable to specify "High Speed Train", but then again the information as to the onboard facilities is provided on the timetable and usually on the departure boards too.

In Europe, the differentiation generally relates to ticket pricing. In the UK, tickets are priced by route and operator rather than stopping pattern and class of service, so I would still argue that this is the most pertinent information to display. In this sense, I strongly disagree with the author of the article who "doesn't care what corporate entity owns [the train]" (let's not point out that the TOC is not the ROSCO) - this is exceptionally useful information regarding whether your ticket is valid, in fact it is our equivalent of this. The onboard amenities are usually listed separately.

 

[gordonthemoron]

In Germany, there are very few routes which have ICE/IC without Regional trains, the only one I can think of is Berlin-Dresden. Whereas in the UK there are loads of routes with only Intercity. Furthermore, there is a significant price differentiation between classes in Germany and that is not that common in the UK

 

[Bletchleyite]

Has this been considered for the UK?

It wasn't just considered for the UK - we invented it, near enough! We certainly invented InterCity.

Then we abandoned it.

Part of the reason, if I recall rightly, was that the Government retained the trademark "InterCity" and TOCs wouldn't pay for it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Could be an interesting one, so for example:

VTWC / VTEC is now IC - Intercity, generally long enough to accommodate most passengers with a seat, high speed operations (providing the OLE is up)

Cross Country is now RG - Regional service, way too few carriages so you'll probably end up sitting next to the (probably broken) loos

TPE is now RGE - As the above, but sitting next to the loo will be an luxury with even less capacity available

Northern is now XXX - Local commuter services, if you are lucky a Pacer won't show up with more people per square metre than a Mini on a university campus

For the UK you could easily work with something like:-

ICP - Intercity Premium - long-distance limited stop with buffet car and First Class
IC - Intercity - as ICP but may be trolley, e.g. XC
RE - Regional Express - any non-IC service that doesn't serve all stations (other than Parly ones)
R - Regional (or maybe L - Local) - all stations stopping service

 

[Moonshot]

Not sure what it would achieve ....there is already enough out there to tell passengers which train goes where. I m sure anybody wanting to go from Manchester Piccadilly to Stockport really couldnt care less which is an intecity and which is not.....they simply want to get from A to B

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not sure what it would achieve ....there is already enough out there to tell passengers which train goes where. I m sure anybody wanting to go from Manchester Piccadilly to Stockport really couldnt care less which is an intecity and which is not.....they simply want to get from A to B

No, but if you're going to Birmingham from Euston it's a handy way of knowing which one not to get if you have an interavailable ticket. That does confuse people now.

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

 

[Dave1987]

I've had people ask me when the next service to London is. I've told them to which they have replied "Ow but that isn't the fast train". Even though the non intercity service would have got them into London sooner they have insisted on waiting for the intercity service which was running late! I've seen some commuters get onto a packed intercity service to only then bemoan they can't get a seat even though there were plenty of seats available on the stopping service which would have taken a whole 8 minutes longer. Some people seem to take great pride in the fact an intercity service stops at their station. It is rather amusing when you think about the sigma attached to non intercity services compared to intercity services.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I m sure anybody wanting to go from Manchester Piccadilly to Stockport really couldnt care less which is an intecity and which is not.

No, but if you're travelling from (as the author was) Didcot to London you'd want to know which train had first class and a buffet counter and which train had nowt.

 

[Moonshot]

No, but if you're going to Birmingham from Euston it's a handy way of knowing which one not to get if you have an interavailable ticket. That does confuse people now.

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

Tickets and fares etc are the subject of a TSC enquiry anyway. As I m right in the firing line so to speak, we really need to simplify things.

 

[Moonshot]

No, but if you're travelling from (as the author was) Didcot to London you'd want to know which train had first class and a buffet counter and which train had nowt.

isnt that already advertised anyway ?

 

[Tetchytyke]

isnt that already advertised anyway ?

Not unless you go delving into the timetable to look up whether it has a picture of a teacup.

There are many examples where the stopper and the bells-and-whistles express is run by the same company- look at Greater Anglia- and some sort of differentiation can only be a good thing.

Bus companies see the value of it. It's not another case of "not invented here" for the railways is it?

 

[Moonshot]

Not unless you go delving into the timetable to look up whether it has a picture of a teacup.

There are many examples where the stopper and the bells-and-whistles express is run by the same company- look at Greater Anglia- and some sort of differentiation can only be a good thing.

Bus companies see the value of it. It's not another case of "not invented here" for the railways is it?

No I m simply pointing out the view from the inside - trains are already well advertised as to what the bells and whistles of each individual service is. Cant really see any added major value in what is being suggested, if there was it would already be happening.

 

[me123]

Not unless you go delving into the timetable to look up whether it has a picture of a teacup.

There are many examples where the stopper and the bells-and-whistles express is run by the same company- look at Greater Anglia- and some sort of differentiation can only be a good thing.

Bus companies see the value of it. It's not another case of "not invented here" for the railways is it?

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.

 

[sheff1]

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).

Any information is of use only if it is factual.

Many a time a train is announced as "First Class Accommodation is at the front" only for it to arrive in the platform with first class at the rear (even though it has been en route for an hour or more with that configuration).

How many times do you board a train which the screen says "conveys a buffet car" only to hear an announcement that "there are no catering facilities today" or one which has "an at seat trolley service" which turns out to be someone at the opposite end of an HST who announces that "if you want any refreshments please make your way through the train" ?

Changing the message to "Intercity train" would achieve nothing if you then board to find no catering, for example.

 

[glbotu]

So, the Germanic countries' classification systems are largely historical in nature, much like the really specific way that we run railways are. A big part of the distinction between IC(E), R, RE, S, U, A, IR, EC (there are a lot more), are who subsidises the service. R and RE are subsidised by the Lande (state). IR tend to be subsidised by two or more Lande, who are closely linked, IC and ICE are run by the Bundes (federal government), S and U are run by the stadt (city), EC are run off of EU grants (or certainly were at some point).

But then you get things like the AKN Eisenbahn, which is an entirely privately run railway (track, trains, the whole shebang) that operates as part of the Hamburg Verkersverbund (commuter network) and basically runs pacers everywhere (I mean, they're a bit better than pacers, but still, aging 2 car DMUs).

These can all be operated by any company, it just so happens that about 90% of them are run by Deutsche Bahn, because they have the resources to run large numbers of franchises in Germany, so consistently win them.

This doesn't exist in Britain, because at pretty much all stages of our railway's existence, along a route, we've accepted all tickets (ignoring advances etc). Even in pre-big 4 years, with the track and train operated by single companies, along that company's route, you'd get your ticket and you'd travel (class-appropriate of course).

In the specific example (Didcot to Paddington), it would be useful to say "stopping service", because that's actually useful information (which I think is what GTR does on its Cambridge stoppers, to distinguish them from Fasts and Semi-Fasts). The thing is, the classification system, while it would be useful for local people, would make tourist travel much harder, because the expectation would be that when you bought a ticket, you could only take R, RE and IR services unless you had a reservation (for the IC(E) service), which unless we overhauled our railway network (for the worse - mind - we don't have the track capacity to have that sort of differentiation), you'd end up with disproportionate numbers of tourists on the "wrong" trains.

 

[sheff1]

The thing is, the classification system, while it would be useful for local people, would make tourist travel much harder, because the expectation would be that when you bought a ticket, you could only take R, RE and IR services unless you had a reservation (for the IC(E) service), which unless we overhauled our railway network (for the worse - mind - we don't have the track capacity to have that sort of differentiation), you'd end up with disproportionate numbers of tourists on the "wrong" trains.

Are there really "disproportionate numbers of tourists on the 'wrong' trains" in Switzerland, where they use the classification system ?

 

[glbotu]

Are there really "disproportionate numbers of tourists on the 'wrong' trains" in Switzerland, where they use the classification system ?

No, because its appropriate in Switzerland, because they have the same system, where a "Regional" train allows anyone on, but you need reservations and to pay extra for an "Inter-City" train.

The problem would come on services like Newcastle to Durham/Darlington/York, where XC and VT would be "IC" and the TPE service would be "RE" and the tourists would buy a ticket and head to the hourly 3 car 185, without realising they could get on the the other 4 trains an hour.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No, because its appropriate in Switzerland, because they have the same system, where a "Regional" train allows anyone on, but you need reservations and to pay extra for an "Inter-City" train.

No, they don't. In Switzerland all trains are just "trains", like here - IC, IR and R/RE/S are only about what kind of train it is in terms of rolling stock, stopping pattern, catering and on board staffing and precisely how the Selbstkontrolle (PF) rules[1] work. SBB even insists than nominally reservation-only trains (EC/TGV) are still "trains" inside Switzerland and reservations are not required for domestic journeys on those, either. ICEs do not require reservations anyway other than the odd case of the Strasbourg ones which SNCF insisted were operated as effectively TGVs.

Switzerland doesn't even have the thing Germany does where Verbund (PTE) tickets are only valid on local trains.

There is *one* exception, and one only (that I know of) - the Glacier Express tourist train which effectively operates as a charter.

[1] On R/RE/S which are DOO the penalty fares rules are absolute - you must have a ticket before you board with no excuses accepted at all - might even be the case that a failed TVM means a closed station. On IC/IR it's a bit looser, and there are a defined, published list of valid excuses, of which "clueless foreign tourist" is actually one.

 

[Chris M]

How many times do you board a train which the screen says "conveys a buffet car" only to hear an announcement that "there are no catering facilities today"

Being pedantic, conveying a buffet car and having operational catering facilities (and staff to operate them) are not the same thing. If it says "Buffet service available" then that would be a different matter.
I agree though that there is no practical difference as far as most passengers are concerned (although a lack of catering staff may please those who like to travel in single seats in coach K on WTWC services).

 

[adamello]

In the specific example (Didcot to Paddington), it would be useful to say "stopping service", because that's actually useful information (which I think is what GTR does on its Cambridge stoppers, to distinguish them from Fasts and Semi-Fasts).

SWT also show stopping service, and advertise, get off here to change to a faster service to waterloo (for example)

 

[glbotu]

No, they don't. In Switzerland all trains are just "trains", like here - IC, IR and R/RE/S are only about what kind of train it is in terms of rolling stock, stopping pattern, catering and on board staffing and precisely how the Selbstkontrolle (PF) rules[1] work. SBB even insists than nominally reservation-only trains (EC/TGV) are still "trains" inside Switzerland and reservations are not required for domestic journeys on those, either. ICEs do not require reservations anyway other than the odd case of the Strasbourg ones which SNCF insisted were operated as effectively TGVs.

Switzerland doesn't even have the thing Germany does where Verbund (PTE) tickets are only valid on local trains.

There is *one* exception, and one only (that I know of) - the Glacier Express tourist train which effectively operates as a charter.

[1] On R/RE/S which are DOO the penalty fares rules are absolute - you must have a ticket before you board with no excuses accepted at all - might even be the case that a failed TVM means a closed station. On IC/IR it's a bit looser, and there are a defined, published list of valid excuses, of which "clueless foreign tourist" is actually one.

My mistake kind of illustrates my point though. I, as someone who, I would posit, is pretty clued up on transport systems, was under the complete impression, having been to Switzerland, that it was operating under the Germanic model (conveniently, I was on reserved tickets, so didn't affect me so much). I would suggest that, to the average tourist who is used to the Germanic system, they would make the same mistake.

Not that I don't think that we couldn't do more to differentiate between services, just that rigorously applying U/S/R/IC model might not be the best way.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Germanic model doesn't require seat reservations on any[1] services (other than night trains) either, though it does differentiate prices - but an ICE ticket is valid on an RB if you want, give or take the complication of Verbund areas. DB is remarkably similar to the UK in many operational ways.

It's the Romance (France, Italy, Spain, Portugal etc) and Russian (also eastern European) models that require reservations on InterCity type trains.

[1] Other than the ICEs going to France which are operationally TGVs, they have the TGV catering model (freebies in 1st rather than a paid for restaurant car) too.

 

[sheff1]

No, because its appropriate in Switzerland, because they have the same system, where a "Regional" train allows anyone on, but you need reservations and to pay extra for an "Inter-City" train.

That is completely incorrect.

 

[sheff1]

Being pedantic, conveying a buffet car and having operational catering facilities (and staff to operate them) are not the same thing. If it says "Buffet service available" then that would be a different matter.

You are of course correct. Thinking about it, I am pretty sure "Buffet service (or car ?) available" is what is displayed on the screens.

 

[glbotu]

The Germanic model doesn't require seat reservations on any[1] services (other than night trains) either, though it does differentiate prices - but an ICE ticket is valid on an RB if you want, give or take the complication of Verbund areas. DB is remarkably similar to the UK in many operational ways.

It's the Romance (France, Italy, Spain, Portugal etc) and Russian (also eastern European) models that require reservations on InterCity type trains.

[1] Other than the ICEs going to France which are operationally TGVs, they have the TGV catering model (freebies in 1st rather than a paid for restaurant car) too.

But you can't use an RB ticket on IC services though, right? That's where the problem lies. The reverse makes sense (it's a cheaper ticket). In the UK, that's exactly what's possible, where the norm is you can take any train via "any permitted route" and restrictions are added if you specifically get a certain train or routing to cheapen the ticket. The point being that we use Intercity services to take care of local flows (like Durham - Newcastle or Wakefield - Leeds), because we don't have the capacity to do otherwise.

I think we've got too hung up on the reservation-based conversation (and correcting my misunderstanding of the Swiss system), rather than looking at the issue that I was trying to raise, which is how best to indicate that any train can be taken, versus the ability to differentiate between service types.

 

[glbotu]

That is completely incorrect.

Which I acknowledged in post 25 above.....