Marylebone Dual Boarding

[TransportHub]

But it's a classic example of the crass stupidity of not having train numbers. Every (I think) other system in Europe (and quite possibly beyond) uses them but we persist with this "not invented here" refusal to accept that they have some merit.

We do have that already, headcodes, they just aren't publicised to the normals. Except on Eurostar where they are all 9Ixx or 9Oxx so the train number matches (91xx or 90xx)

 

[rmHawk765]

But it's a classic example of the crass stupidity of not having train numbers. Every (I think) other system in Europe (and quite possibly beyond) uses them but we persist with this "not invented here" refusal to accept that they have some merit.

Europe doesn't actually have meaningful route identificators for the most part, it's just train numbers that seem random to regular passengers (AIUI) and are difficult to remember.

 

[chiltern trev]

Were they both shown as Edinburgh trains on indicators? I'd have thought the slower one would have been described as destination Berwick or wherever the penultimate stop was. On Southeastern and its predecessors, if trains divide at Ashford with both halves for Ramsgate, one via Canterbury West and one via Dover, it's long been the practice (back to the days of wooden finger boards) to display and announce the via Dover portion as only going to Sandwich.

Both were shown as Edinburgh but I cannot remember if there was additional via info. eg.
Edinburgh via WCML and Edinburgh via ECML
or
Edinburgh via Preston and Edinburgh via York - or maybe some other intermdiate location(s).

 

[Warrior2852]

Both were shown as Edinburgh but I cannot remember if there was additional via info. eg.
Edinburgh via WCML and Edinburgh via ECML
or
Edinburgh via Preston and Edinburgh via York - or maybe some other intermdiate location(s).

It wouldn't have said WCML/ECML, those acronyms aren't known by enough of the public to be useful on a departure board. Specifying Preston and York would be pretty likely though.