Lack of clarity on Rail Replacement Bus services

[TUC]

Looking at the LNER website on details of services during the current engineering work around York, what is striking is how it would not be clear to passengers who just looked at the main content of the screen, rather than the smaller text around it, that a Rail Replacement Bus service forms part of their journey.

In the example below, yes the fact of it being a bus service between York and Darlington is stated in small type, but the fact that the larger core of the screen still proclaims the journey to be a Cross Country service, talks about wheelchair spaces being available and says help is available for 'boarding the train' can lead people to think this is a regular rail service that they will be using.

I know that these are standard lines that appear for any journey, but surely it is possible to surpress/amend them when a RRB is being used?

 

[Scott1]

Seems clear to me. It is a rail replacement, but the operator is still CrossCountry. It states, twice, that it is a bus.

 

[TUC]

Seems clear to me. It is a rail replacement, but the operator is still CrossCountry. It states, twice, that it is a bus.

I don't think you're taking into account how most people read information, which is being drawn towards that which is most visually prominent, not the small type at the edges.

 

[zwk500]

Seems clear to me. It is a rail replacement, but the operator is still CrossCountry. It states, twice, that it is a bus.

It only states 1 time that the entire journey is a bus. The other mention just says part of the journey includes a bus link.
This is largely a problem with the data structure for how the schedules are planned and sent to the booking systems. They could make the grey box much more visually prominent, but otherwise it needs lots of money spending on back end systems to be able to adapt the seating codes etc to switch to BUS when appropriate, and nobody has the money or time to do that right now.

 

[TUC]

It only states 1 time that the entire journey is a bus. The other mention just says part of the journey includes a bus link.
This is largely a problem with the data structure for how the schedules are planned and sent to the booking systems. They could make the grey box much more visually prominent, but otherwise it needs lots of money spending on back end systems to be able to adapt the seating codes etc to switch to BUS when appropriate, and nobody has the money or time to do that right now.

Does it? Wouldn't putting the Bus messages in bold type of equivalent size to the rest and greying out/blocking the information in the right hand box in the example below (or equivalent) be technically very simple solutions?

 

[zwk500]

Does it? Wouldn't putting the Bus messages in bold type of equivalent size to the rest and greying out/blocking the information in the right hand box in the example below (or equivalent) be technically very simple solutions?

Maybe they could write a piece of code that overwrites the default box for Buses, but it'd still requires a developer's fee.

 

[TUC]

Maybe they could write a piece of code that overwrites the default box for Buses, but it'd still requires a developer's fee.

That seems surprising. It doesn't sound fundamentally different to when a retailer wants a 'half price sale' box to appear when particular products are selected on specific days, but not for all the other products or on other days.

 

[zwk500]

That seems surprising. It doesn't sound fundamentally different to when a retailer wants a 'half price sale' box to appear when particular products are selected on specific days, but not for all the other products or on other days.

It depends on the specification for the website when built, but I'd guess that even the half price sale boxes had an initial fee for implementation.

 

[ASharpe]

Don't underestimate the fees for even basic development or customisation on a website. And for niche situation where the return on investment is likely to be negative as fewer people book just forget it.

 

[Horizon22]

The info is there, but I agree it could be emphasised a little bit better. Maybe a yellow warning triangle and bolder text. Odd to put the operator on there (who cares that much who is running the bus lol) but might have gone automatically through that way if it's in the timetable data.

It's certainly not helpful stating "this train has standard class seating only" or "extra help boarding the train"!

 

[markymark2000]

Why don't any train operators make it easier for people when it comes to rail replacement buses too. 1 making it much simpler for people to see what is a bus and what is a train. Mostly a trainline issue but a number of people see 'Bus' on their journey plan and then ask staff which bus is going to [place] and it's actually a train that they have just missed. It should be made much clearer. Just a simple 'And then change onto the bus' or 'and then change onto the train' bit of text could change things.

Secondly, why has no journey planner managed to sort systems to show where the rail replacement bus stops. Save people having to check different pages for the bus stop or, wrongly in most cases, assuming that the bus stops directly outside the bus stop. Anyone who in involved in rail replacement will tell you the amount of people who miss or chase the buses because they are not in the right place. Journey planners should be much better better at giving people information on where to catch replacement buses from. All TOCs have the information already as they display it in their station information pages. There must be a database somewhere behind the scenes which puts the information on all train operators and National Rails websites.

The info is there, but I agree it could be emphasised a little bit better. Maybe a yellow warning triangle and bolder text. Odd to put the operator on there (who cares that much who is running the bus lol) but might have gone automatically through that way if it's in the timetable data.

Probably mostly for complaint purposes. If there are any issues, it's much easier to pass blame rather than working together. For example, if that bus is late and the person misses the train, LNER will say 'That's not our bus, we don't know where it is or have any updates'. Or 'That bus didn't call at my stop', LNER would reply 'That's not our bus, you have to speak to Cross Country for them to sort it'.

 

[TUC]

Probably mostly for complaint purposes. If there are any issues, it's much easier to pass blame rather than working together. For example, if that bus is late and the person misses the train, LNER will say 'That's not our bus, we don't know where it is or have any updates'. Or 'That bus didn't call at my stop', LNER would reply 'That's not our bus, you have to speak to Cross Country for them to sort it'.

Where multiple TOCs are affected by the same closure, such as Darlington-York in this case, does one TOC take the lead in arranging RRBs for all of them? If so, how is this determined?

 

[yorkie]

Where multiple TOCs are affected by the same closure, such as Darlington-York in this case, does one TOC take the lead in arranging RRBs for all of them? If so, how is this determined?

LNER organise it but lack full information regarding the whereabouts of other operators buses.

When I made a journey, XC buses to Darlington were not turning up and passengers were sent on an alternative bus to Northallerton. We then had over an hour to wait at Northallerton with no onward train; lovely.

Secondly, why has no journey planner managed to sort systems to show where the rail replacement bus stops. Save people having to check different pages for the bus stop or, wrongly in most cases, assuming that the bus stops directly outside the bus stop. Anyone who in involved in rail replacement will tell you the amount of people who miss or chase the buses because they are not in the right place. Journey planners should be much better better at giving people information on where to catch replacement buses from. All TOCs have the information already as they display it in their station information pages. There must be a database somewhere behind the scenes which puts the information on all train operators and National Rails websites.

There is no provision for journey planners to do this as far as I know.

Please don't blame the journey planners for failings of the TOCs.

 

[Joey Beauchamp]

I dread catching rail replacement buses unless it's from a larger station. Yesterday I needed to catch the 9.50 rail replacement from Long Buckby to make a connection at Rugby. I checked it was still running before I left the house. When I got to the station it had disappeared from the departure board. I tried to book a taxi but the prices were excessive so I resigned myself to waiting for the 10.25 bus. At 9.56 a coach with Rugby on the front turned up! I asked the driver if this was the delayed 9.50 and he checked his form and said "no I'm the 10 o'clock". He waited until 10am before leaving and I caught the train I wanted but only just. When I checked Google maps it said that the 9.50 was delayed until 10.05! Surely with GPS and live times the information should be less contradictory?

A few months ago I caught a rail replacement bus from Pevensey & Westham. I knew they sometimes set off a few minutes early so I left plenty of time. As I got to the corner I saw a bus go past, 10 minutes before it was timetabled. There was another bus waiting and the driver was chatting to a man with a clipboard. I asked them if this was the 9.55 and one of them said "no that's gone". When I asked why, the man with the clipboard said "because I sent it". I enquired what the point of having a timetable was, reasonably politely but with enough of an edge that the driver said "don't worry I'll get you there." So that meant I'd inadvertently made the next bus leave early too, possibly inconveniencing someone else!

 

[markymark2000]

Where multiple TOCs are affected by the same closure, such as Darlington-York in this case, does one TOC take the lead in arranging RRBs for all of them? If so, how is this determined?

In my experience, 99% of the time, no TOC takes the lead. Each TOC runs their own buses for their own services and it causes an almighty hoo haa for staff on the ground and bus operators. Tending to result in everyone blaming eachother and either vastly overbussed or underbussed operation. Take a look at Gloucester on the 21st Jan 2023. TFW, Cross Country and GWR all running buses. Within 12 minutes, 3 buses run between Gloucester and Cheltenham (xx20, xx22 and xx32), each by different operators. Each operator will have their own staff there too (TFW by Abellio, Cross Country by Arriva Road Transport, sometimes sub contracted to CMAC and Great Western by First). No one knows whether they are coming and going. It looks really poor to passengers and causes the situations which people often vent about on twitter of 'chaos and no one knows what is going on'.



The only instance that I have seen operators working together is on the East Coast Mainline when a few times recently operators have pooled buses together to get people moving. Least this is how Martijn Gilbert CEO of Lumo suggest it to be.

https://twitter.com/NEMartijn/status/1603406481059184647

We’re doing all we can @LumoTravel during today’s disruption between Newcastle and Edinburgh, with colleagues working alongside @LNER to support customers on terminating trains and we’ve rail replacement coaches in the ‘all TOC’ mix from @firsttravelsol including @stanley_travel

https://twitter.com/NEMartijn/status/1603406481059184647

Hi Alexandra. As it would be almost impossible to sort each of the four different train company customers from the queue, everyone is working together for customers and the coaches are pooled between all operators so it’s just one queue. Apologies for the delay to your journey.

There is no provision for journey planners to do this as far as I know.

Please don't blame the journey planners for failings of the TOCs.

To be fair, it was more aimed at TOC journey planners. 3rd party journey planners would likely find it harder to do as they wouldn't have all of the stop information.

I dread catching rail replacement buses unless it's from a larger station. Yesterday I needed to catch the 9.50 rail replacement from Long Buckby to make a connection at Rugby. I checked it was still running before I left the house. When I got to the station it had disappeared from the departure board. I tried to book a taxi but the prices were excessive so I resigned myself to waiting for the 10.25 bus. At 9.56 a coach with Rugby on the front turned up! I asked the driver if this was the delayed 9.50 and he checked his form and said "no I'm the 10 o'clock". He waited until 10am before leaving and I caught the train I wanted but only just. When I checked Google maps it said that the 9.50 was delayed until 10.05! Surely with GPS and live times the information should be less contradictory?

Tracking from buses is not shared with any railway systems so live times are never accurate. In many cases, even the contractor (Abellio, First Travel Solutions, Arriva Road Transport) doesn't have live tracking. They rely upon drivers and coordinators providing updates. Generally, the only time the contractors see tracking is if there is an incident like missed station and they ask for proof that stations were served and things like that. Once the contractor has the information 99.9% of the time, if the information is sent to the train operator, nothing gets done about it anyway.
As for the times, some operators are better at inputting times than others. Transport for Wales are awful at inputting the right times for buses for example but others manage it with ease. How train operators mess it up I don't know as they are the ones who set the timetables and yet they still can't put them into their own systems correctly.

A few months ago I caught a rail replacement bus from Pevensey & Westham. I knew they sometimes set off a few minutes early so I left plenty of time. As I got to the corner I saw a bus go past, 10 minutes before it was timetabled. There was another bus waiting and the driver was chatting to a man with a clipboard. I asked them if this was the 9.55 and one of them said "no that's gone". When I asked why, the man with the clipboard said "because I sent it". I enquired what the point of having a timetable was, reasonably politely but with enough of an edge that the driver said "don't worry I'll get you there." So that meant I'd inadvertently made the next bus leave early too, possibly inconveniencing someone else!

Theres a number of reasons why that could have happened such as issues further up on the route which risks peoples connections. Or the bus could have been full etc. Some of it though is down to poor staff.

 

[Watershed]

In my experience, 99% of the time, no TOC takes the lead. Each TOC runs their own buses for their own services and it causes an almighty hoo haa for staff on the ground and bus operators. Tending to result in everyone blaming eachother and either vastly overbussed or underbussed operation. Take a look at Gloucester on the 21st Jan 2023. TFW, Cross Country and GWR all running buses. Within 12 minutes, 3 buses run between Gloucester and Cheltenham (xx20, xx22 and xx32), each by different operators. Each operator will have their own staff there too (TFW by Abellio, Cross Country by Arriva Road Transport, sometimes sub contracted to CMAC and Great Western by First). No one knows whether they are coming and going. It looks really poor to passengers and causes the situations which people often vent about on twitter of 'chaos and no one knows what is going on'.

This is a good example of how disjointed bus provision typically is. On some routes served by multiple TOCs, there are more effective plans - for instance, during WCML blocks north of Carlisle, Avanti organise all the Glasgow buses and TPE organise all the Edinburgh buses. It's not perfect but it's a lot better than both running their own buses to connect with their own curtailed trains.

To be fair, it was more aimed at TOC journey planners. 3rd party journey planners would likely find it harder to do as they wouldn't have all of the stop information.

I don't think there's any notable difference between TOC and 3rd party journey planners in this respect (noting that most TOC journey planners are simply branded versions of Trainline/Worldline's white label journey planner). The information isn't supplied through an industry-wide database or feed in the same way that fares, Routeing Guide data and (basic) station information are; any retailer that wanted to stand out could therefore research it manually.

 

[Scott1]

Busses are very hit and miss. Sometimes they just let staff on the ground organise them how they see fit, other times they will insist a bus runs to time even when the connecting train is late. A lot is down to how used to this the bus driver is. An experienced driver will often wait to meet the train, but they can't do that if they don't know what train they are waiting for.

This is all assuming you can find the bus stop. I agree that it needs to be added to the data feed somehow so that journey planners can show the location of the stop.

 

[Starmill]

There are some cases where buses go into a general pool and the coordination can be done together. The Commonwealth Games was an example of this, West Midlands Trains funded a number of buses which were part of the general Games shuttle service for Games ticket holders. Rail tickets were therefore accepted on the Games shuttles - though in general there wasn't any checking of either kind of ticket it was just board the bus and off you go.

Of course, this was an exception rather than a rule!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Jan 2023 ==

This is a good example of how disjointed bus provision typically is. On some routes served by multiple TOCs, there are more effective plans - for instance, during WCML blocks north of Carlisle, Avanti organise all the Glasgow buses and TPE organise all the Edinburgh buses. It's not perfect but it's a lot better than both running their own buses to connect with their own curtailed trains.

The one good thing about this is that generally tickets from any operator will be accepted on all of the buses, not least because usually no tickets are checked (though sometimes they will be of course!). If the bus coordinator is asked about tickets they'll almost always confirm that any ticket is fine and just make sure you're going the right way. The downside of the situation specifically at Carlisle is that it means that usually the TOC-specifc tickets aren't available for online and online-enabled purchases e.g. the TransPennine Express only flexible tickets from Penrith to Glasgow. I don't know if the ticket office at Penrith in that circumstance would agree to sell them or not.

 

[geoffk]

And what about the message at the bottom referring to the onward train on which "seat reservations are mandatory". That's no longer correct is it?

 

[Joey Beauchamp]

Tracking from buses is not shared with any railway systems so live times are never accurate. In many cases, even the contractor (Abellio, First Travel Solutions, Arriva Road Transport) doesn't have live tracking. They rely upon drivers and coordinators providing updates. Generally, the only time the contractors see tracking is if there is an incident like missed station and they ask for proof that stations were served and things like that. Once the contractor has the information 99.9% of the time, if the information is sent to the train operator, nothing gets done about it anyway.
As for the times, some operators are better at inputting times than others. Transport for Wales are awful at inputting the right times for buses for example but others manage it with ease. How train operators mess it up I don't know as they are the ones who set the timetables and yet they still can't put them into their own systems correctly.


Theres a number of reasons why that could have happened such as issues further up on the route which risks peoples connections. Or the bus could have been full etc. Some of it though is down to poor staff.

What was weird yesterday is that the 9.50 bus did show in journey planners / live departures but then disappeared from them despite it clearly still existing. Someone must have removed it in error.

At Pevensey & Westham (and I expect this happens elsewhere) the bus was supposed to meet a terminating train. I expect it did this and the man in charge assumed no one would want to catch the bus from P&W. Which is a weird assumption to make as it's quite a busy station (although I expect many would drive to Polegate during disruption if they had the option).

 

[Watershed]

And what about the message at the bottom referring to the onward train on which "seat reservations are mandatory". That's no longer correct is it?

It's never been correct in the sense that you would be turned away for not having a reservation. But LNER are on of the handful of operators that persist with the unhelpful practice of falsely marking their trains as reservation compulsory in the timetable data, thus forcing journey planners to issue reservations to be able to sell a ticket on them.

 

[markymark2000]

This is a good example of how disjointed bus provision typically is. On some routes served by multiple TOCs, there are more effective plans - for instance, during WCML blocks north of Carlisle, Avanti organise all the Glasgow buses and TPE organise all the Edinburgh buses. It's not perfect but it's a lot better than both running their own buses to connect with their own curtailed trains.

Interesting, I didn't know some areas were so organised. Then again, Avanti and TPE are now both under First Travel Solutions so it would make no difference other than who funds each bus and if the funds seem relatively equal, it makes no difference. Might as well do things a simple way. Sadly though, not all TOCs are like that.

I don't think there's any notable difference between TOC and 3rd party journey planners in this respect (noting that most TOC journey planners are simply branded versions of Trainline/Worldline's white label journey planner). The information isn't supplied through an industry-wide database or feed in the same way that fares, Routeing Guide data and (basic) station information are; any retailer that wanted to stand out could therefore research it manually.

How the data isn't in an industry wide database is beyond me. It should be. all TOCs have 'stations' pages which mostly cover all UK stations, not just their own. Plus of course 3rd party sites. A single central database which the 'station managing toc' has to edit, would mean all sites are singing from the same hymn sheet and open up opportunities for something such as this. Telling people where the bus replacements stop. Would save a lot of hassle for the less experienced traveller. This isn't just for rail replacement stop but the bike spaces, car park info and so on, so forth. All important to travellers and all train operators should be showing the same information for stations.

Busses are very hit and miss. Sometimes they just let staff on the ground organise them how they see fit, other times they will insist a bus runs to time even when the connecting train is late. A lot is down to how used to this the bus driver is. An experienced driver will often wait to meet the train, but they can't do that if they don't know what train they are waiting for.

Very rare to leave staff to get on with it unless it's an emergency blockade. For any pre planned block with timetables, the bus should remain on the duty board they are provided. Some holding for late trains is acceptable but the duty boards, least for most contractors, are timed for legal breaks. You've also got to be conscious that while you may be saving the people on the train from waiting, anyone already on the bus or waiting for the bus will be made later and risk missing connections. You've got to weigh it up on a case by case basis.

It's mostly down to a good coordinator rather than driver. A strong coordinator knows the situation around the line. Knows connections at either end and weighs up the situation. Upto 5 minutes is perfectly fine. Upto 10 minutes depends on other connections. Beyond that, weigh up the impact to driving hours, passengers waiting at that station and up the line and potential impact to incoming passengers. Some drivers won't be best pleased but 99% of them know what side their bread is buttered.

At Pevensey & Westham (and I expect this happens elsewhere) the bus was supposed to meet a terminating train. I expect it did this and the man in charge assumed no one would want to catch the bus from P&W. Which is a weird assumption to make as it's quite a busy station (although I expect many would drive to Polegate during disruption if they had the option).

Partly explains why someone may send a bus early but still inexcusable from the perspective that people could still turn up upto the departure time.

 

[Watershed]

Interesting, I didn't know some areas were so organised. Then again, Avanti and TPE are now both under First Travel Solutions so it would make no difference other than who funds each bus and if the funds seem relatively equal, it makes no difference. Might as well do things a simple way. Sadly though, not all TOCs are like that.

This practice has been around since before Avanti was a FirstGroup TOC. As you say, it's a fairly rare example though

How the data isn't in an industry wide database is beyond me. It should be. all TOCs have 'stations' pages which mostly cover all UK stations, not just their own. Plus of course 3rd party sites. A single central database which the 'station managing toc' has to edit, would mean all sites are singing from the same hymn sheet and open up opportunities for something such as this. Telling people where the bus replacements stop. Would save a lot of hassle for the less experienced traveller. This isn't just for rail replacement stop but the bike spaces, car park info and so on, so forth. All important to travellers and all train operators should be showing the same information for stations.

This is just one of many datapoints that aren't in an industry database. If you're going to open up the rail industry to competition from different operators and retailers, the sensible thing to do would be to provide a comprehensive database of everything that passengers might be interested in knowing. Unfortunately that seems to be too difficult to organise in the disjointed UK rail industry, and it's left to individual companies to do their own thing.

 

[zwk500]

How the data isn't in an industry wide database is beyond me.

Cost.

 

[Watershed]

Cost.

And here you have your central problem. The industry knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing...

 

[[.n]]

Don't underestimate the fees for even basic development or customisation on a website. And for niche situation where the return on investment is likely to be negative as fewer people book just forget it.

Rail Replacement Buses are not a niche situation on our rail network, so the investment should definitely be made

 

[yorkie]

Rail Replacement Buses are not a niche situation on our rail network, so the investment should definitely be made

The rail industry doesn't want to invest in the data feeds being suitable; instead the expectation is that each individual retailer should make their own adjustments if they want fancy stuff (see the discussion regarding Standard Premium in another thread; there is no provision in the data for this class of ticket)

 

[[.n]]

The rail industry doesn't want to invest in the data feeds being suitable; instead the expectation is that each individual retailer should make their own adjustments if they want fancy stuff (see the discussion regarding Standard Premium in another thread; there is no provision in the data for this class of ticket)

Oh yes, I can see they don't want to invest - but as I noted ironically running buses isn't a niche by product of being a TOC - and so the data is an essential part of the information they should be providing as standard.

 

[The Planner]

And here you have your central problem. The industry knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing...

I would be more inclined to believe it would be who looks after it. No one would want the responsibility, either to set it up or maintaining it.

 

[Starmill]

This practice has been around since before Avanti was a FirstGroup TOC. As you say, it's a fairly rare example though

I think that it dates back to pre-2014 when there were no more than four TPE services per day to Glasgow Central, but there were progressively more services to Edinburgh over time, up to the supposed full two-hourly service all day. From the point of view of then it makes a lot of sense.