National Routeing Guide update

[Starmill]

Presumably they want you to travel via Didcot instead?

 

[kieron]

Presumably they want you to travel via Didcot instead?

There are often better connections at Cheltenham than at Didcot, even if you don't take the opportunity to go via Stroud and Worcester.

Incidentally, I did forget to mention that ATOC have associated Sherburn-in-Elmet with Selby again. I've added it above now.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
There was a new update released yesterday.

New dataset RJRG0377 published 01 October 2015

Stations added

Oxford Parkway (OXP) has been added and initially associated to the Princes Risborough routeing point.​

Chiltern have decided not to sponsor a 'bus service between Oxford Parkway and Oxford, so there will be no link in that direction when it opens (and so you may have to shop around if you wish to obtain an itinerary on-line).
You will be able to get a train to Haddenham & Thame Parkway, and a train from there to Banbury, but it's not associated with Banbury group.

Oxford Parkway isn't currently in the NFM64 Fares table, so it's hard to say what journeys Princes Risborough (or Banbury) would be a valid routeing point for anyway.

Deleted easement time expired.

700594: On Sunday 27 September 2015, engineering work will see trains from London Waterloo to Exeter diverted between Salisbury and Yeovil Junction via Westbury, Warminster and Castle Cary. This positive map easement will create temporary permitted routes for this diversionary route. This easement applies in both directions​

Now out of date, so they've reused the number.

Following retailer comment, an easement has been published to ensure Advance Purchase tickets from Shenfield to Thetford are available via Norwich in journey planners.

New 700594: To allow journeys to Thetford via Norwich on tickets priced on fare route 00420 AP GRT ANG & CONCTS, this routeing point easement will override the fare check in journey planners. This easement operates in both directions.​

Specifically "& CONCTS", meaning (for instance) that it covers Thetford-London Fields tickets, but not Thetford-London Terminals ones.

 

[embers25]

There are often better connections at Cheltenham than at Didcot, even if you don't take the opportunity to go via Stroud and Worcester.

Incidentally, I did forget to mention that ATOC have associated Sherburn-in-Elmet with Selby again. I've added it above now.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
There was a new update released yesterday.

New dataset RJRG0377 published 01 October 2015

Stations added

Oxford Parkway (OXP) has been added and initially associated to the Princes Risborough routeing point.​

Chiltern have decided not to sponsor a 'bus service between Oxford Parkway and Oxford, so there will be no link in that direction when it opens (and so you may have to shop around if you wish to obtain an itinerary on-line).
You will be able to get a train to Haddenham & Thame Parkway, and a train from there to Banbury, but it's not associated with Banbury group.

Oxford Parkway isn't currently in the NFM64 Fares table, so it's hard to say what journeys Princes Risborough (or Banbury) would be a valid routeing point for anyway.

How can Chiltern not run a bus without doing formal closure procedures..unless they allow Oxford-Bicester Town to be valid via Banbury?

 

[Andrew1395]

How can Chiltern not run a bus without doing formal closure procedures..unless they allow Oxford-Bicester Town to be valid via Banbury?

I think it will be allowed under the shortest route rule. As in effect the railway ends at Oxford Parkway. So Islip to Oxford fares will be valid via princes risborough and Banbury

 

[swt_passenger]

How can Chiltern not run a bus without doing formal closure procedures..unless they allow Oxford-Bicester Town to be valid via Banbury?

Chiltern are using the Water Eaton Park and ride service that will be extended to Oxford station. As posted by Jimm in the thread in the infrastructure section yesterday.

Note p
Bus – Rail connection service number 500.
Operated by Oxford Bus Company. Buses depart outside Oxford train station and return from Oxford Parkway station bus stand A

http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/s...Timetable 25_10 to 12_12_2015 v2 WEB V2_0.pdf

Let's try not to make a mountain out of a molehill...

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think it will be allowed under the shortest route rule. As in effect the railway ends at Oxford Parkway. So Islip to Oxford fares will be valid via princes risborough and Banbury

That would be ridiculous...

 

[embers25]

Chiltern are using the Water Eaton Park and ride service that will be extended to Oxford station. As posted by Jimm in the thread in the infrastructure section yesterday.

Note p
Bus – Rail connection service number 500.
Operated by Oxford Bus Company. Buses depart outside Oxford train station and return from Oxford Parkway station bus stand A

http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/s...Timetable 25_10 to 12_12_2015 v2 WEB V2_0.pdf

Let's try not to make a mountain out of a molehill...

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---



That would be ridiculous...

No it wouldn't if the bus wasn't permitted with train tickets as without it that would be the only option. As the bus is valid it's all moot. The fact that the circuitous route would have had to have been valid without the bus is the likely reason the bus is being allowed in the first place. I also note rather unusually that some trains are advertised as allowing Marylebone to Islip and vv via Oxford Parkway (ie 1405 on Sundays from London for example)

 

[Bletchleyite]

No it wouldn't if the bus wasn't permitted with train tickets as without it that would be the only option. As the bus is valid it's all moot. The fact that the circuitous route would have had to have been valid without the bus is the likely reason the bus is being allowed in the first place. I also note rather unusually that some trains are advertised as allowing Marylebone to Islip and vv via Oxford Parkway (ie 1405 on Sundays from London for example)

I think they are unnecessarily complicating the service by not just stopping everything at Islip, possibly on request.

When is the line due to reach Oxford station proper?

 

[swt_passenger]

No it wouldn't if the bus wasn't permitted with train tickets as without it that would be the only option. As the bus is valid it's all moot. The fact that the circuitous route would have had to have been valid without the bus is the likely reason the bus is being allowed in the first place. I also note rather unusually that some trains are advertised as allowing Marylebone to Islip and vv via Oxford Parkway (ie 1405 on Sundays from London for example)

Doubling back to/from Islip was agreed some months back, the local user group was informed at the time.

I don't disagree that in the absence of a bus link the rail route would have to have been allowed, but it would still be a ridiculous detour for a relatively short journey.

 

[CyrusWuff]

How can Chiltern not run a bus without doing formal closure procedures..unless they allow Oxford-Bicester Town to be valid via Banbury?

Providing the service buses are accepting rail tickets, quite easily.

 

[kieron]

Chiltern are using the Water Eaton Park and ride service that will be extended to Oxford station. As posted by Jimm in the thread in the infrastructure section yesterday.

Note p
Bus – Rail connection service number 500.
Operated by Oxford Bus Company. Buses depart outside Oxford train station and return from Oxford Parkway station bus stand A

I haven't been able to find Jimm's post on this, but I'm aware that the park and ride service has been extended. My concern is that this 'bus service is not included in on-line journey planners, either as a fixed link or a rail replacement service.

This means that if you select a journey from (say) Bicester to Evesham, the planners will suggest a route through King's Sutton, if not further, simply because they don't know how else to get to Oxford.

I am pleased that the 'buses will accept rail tickets, though, for those that know about it.

 

[swt_passenger]

I haven't been able to find Jimm's post on this, but I'm aware that the park and ride service has been extended. My concern is that this 'bus service is not included in on-line journey planners, either as a fixed link (which could be charged separately) or a rail replacement service (which could not).

This means that if you select a journey from (say) Bicester to Evesham, the planners will suggest a route through King's Sutton, if not further, simply because they don't know how else to get to Oxford.

I am pleased to hear that 'bus travel will be included in the ticket price.

I think it has also been mentioned in the other thread that the journey planners are wrong at the moment, perhaps because the services haven't been loaded correctly yet? Maybe waiting for a couple of weeks might be in order?

Jimm only posted a few words confirming the bus, I added the extract from, and link to, the future timetable.

 

[embers25]

Doubling back to/from Islip was agreed some months back, the local user group was informed at the time.

I don't disagree that in the absence of a bus link the rail route would have to have been allowed, but it would still be a ridiculous detour for a relatively short journey.

It would be a huge detour but due to the fare anomally that is the Bicester Town route it would have made for huge savings on some complete and split ticket options making use of Banbury to break journeys.

 

[kieron]

I think it has also been mentioned in the other thread that the journey planners are wrong at the moment, perhaps because the fares haven't been loaded correctly yet? Maybe waiting for a couple of weeks might be in order?

Fixed links and rail replacement 'buses aren't anything to do with fares; they're part of the timetable data. There are lots of trains between Oxford Parkway and London shown from the 26th in the timetable used by journey planners, but nothing at all between Oxford Parkway and Oxford.

I do notice that the National Rail timetable refers you to Chiltern's site for anything after 25/10. If you look at the timetable there rather than the journey planner you'll get something which gives a more direct route, but this isn't ideal as it's generally much easier to plan a journey with a journey planner than with a timetable.

 

[Andrew1395]

Where does it say in the NRCoC that the shortest route by scheduled passenger rail services is trumped by a bus service that accepts rail tickets? If there is no train service from Islip to Oxford (including rail replacement buses as is the case at the moment ) why could nt you go by Banbury if there is a priced flow Islip to Oxford?

 

[PermitToTravel]

If the bus is listed in the National Rail Timetable then it is effectively a train service for the purposes of the shortest route calculation. If it does not, then it is not.

 

[kieron]

There has been another update today.

New dataset RJRG0378 published 07 October 2015

To cater for Club55 promotion on journeys not normally permitted the following easements have been published

Easement added

700595: During the Club 55 promotion, until 14 November 2015, Club 55 tickets on Fare route 00085 TPE ONLY will be valid on FTPE between Newcastle and Kendal via Preston. This Routeing Point easement applies in both directions

700596: During the Club 55 promotion, until 14 November 2015, Club 55 tickets on Fare route 00085 TPE ONLY will be valid from Newcastle to Sheffield via Leeds. this easement applies in both directions.​

I think I'm right in saying that you'd have to go via Manchester for each if you're hoping to use TPE with either ticket. TPE ONLY imposes unusual restrictions on a lot of other routes, of course.

Deletions following completion of engineering works

Easement removed

700585: During Sunday engineering works 27 September and 04 October 2015, when Cross Country services from the West Country to Birmingham New Street and beyond are diverted via Severn Tunnel Junction, Newport (South Wales) and Lydney, this map easement will create temporary permitted routes that will allow Journey Planners to show journeys that include travel through Bristol Temple Meads and Birmingham New Street involving more than one service, (other than those on the shortest route or solely on a through train). This positive map easement operates in both directions.​

In the past now.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Another small update was released yesterday:

New dataset RJRG0379 published 09 October 2015



Following review of map sequences Eastbourne to Leatherhead the following change has been published

Map sequence added

EASTBOURNE GROUP (G84) and Leatherhead (LHD) - added sequence 'CW+VB+AR'Find Item​

No effect. The sequences allowed on CW+VB+AR were already allowed on XB+DK.

Following testing of temporary easements for engineering works, electonic data for Journey Planners amended (journeys on Mon 28th failing to be identified), no change to text of easements

Easement changed

700588: During Engineering works, the railway between Slough and Paddington will be closed on 27/28th December. Due to the level of disruption that customers from the Gloucester / Worcester / Hereford areas would face; tickets on routes 00200 VIA LONDON; 00201 NOT VIA BIRMNGHM; 00411 AP SLOUGH; 00412 AP NEWPT NOT LDN; 00413 AP SLOUGH NEWPRT; 00417 AP KEMBL NOT LDN; 00418 AP KEMBLE SLOUGH; 00433 AP EVESHAM; 00462 AP READING; 00473 AP LONDN READING; 00807 VIA STROUD; 00808 RDG STRD INC LDN, will be permitted to travel via Birmingham and onward to reach London Euston. This positive map easement will create the necessary temporary permitted routes in journey planners. this easement will operate in both directions



700589: Due to a total engineering work closure between Slough and Paddington on 27th/28th December 2015. This map easement is required to allow train services to be shown in journey planners in combination with two bus services that will run: Maidenhead - High Wycombe non-stop. And Maidenhead - all stations to Marlow - High Wycombe. Tickets to/via 'London Terminals' will thus be valid to/from London Marylebone from/to First Great Western origins on these dates only. This positive map easement applies in both directions.​

As stated, the text of these easements hasn't changed.

 

[swt_passenger]

Fixed links and rail replacement 'buses aren't anything to do with fares; they're part of the timetable data.

Yes, I should probably have written 'services' - which would lead to fares not being shown either...

 

[kieron]

Another update was released yesterday.

New dataset RJRG0380 published 14 October 2015

To assist Journey Planners find routes between Fort William and Edinburgh via Glasgow during engineering works, a timing link has been added to the electronic data published to Journey Planners, between Dalmuir and Glasgow Group Routeing Points. The need for this change is a consequence of additional routeing points (north of Glasgow Group) being added into Routeing Guide data.

Map changed

Map FW - GLASGOW AREA TO FORT WILLIAM changed (1 added/ 0 removed links)​

This adds a direct link between Dalmuir and Glasgow, where there were already links via Hyndland and via Westerton.

I don't think there's any way to travel by train from Dalmuir to Glasgow without passing through one of the routeing points at Hyndland, Westerton or Anniesland. If this is the case, there's no way to use this new link.

I suspect this is something to do with Hyndland not being a timing point. As Hyndland East Junction is a timing point, and everything through Hyndland goes through it, I'm left wondering if there's a better way to do this.
The above is incorrect as Anniesland is not a routeing point. A train which runs Ashfield (Glasgow Group)-Anniesland-Scotstounhill-Dalmuir will encounter no routeing points between Ashfield and Dalmuir.

Easement added

700597: During engineering works on the weekends of 7th,8th and 14th,15th November 2015, tickets from London Paddington to Westbury routed 00063 VIA NEWBURY, will be able to travel via Melksham. This positive Fare Route easement will apply in both directions.

700599: During engineering works from 23.25 hrs on 28 November 2015 to 04.55 hrs on 30 November 2015, tickets from London Paddington to Hereford on Fare route VIA EVESHAM will be valid Gloucester and Newport (South wales). this positive fare route easement will be valid in both directions.​

More engineering work.

To facilitate new fares to be introduced for the Chiltern Oxford to London services, a restriction has been created on the existing any permitted tickets, thereby maintaining the historic routeings via Oxford

Easement added

700598: Following the introduction of the Chiltern services from Oxford to London Marylebone; tickets on Fare route 00000 Any Permitted from or via Oxford, Oxford Parkway, Islip or Bicester Village to London or beyond will not be valid on the new services via High Wycombe and will remain valid only via Oxford. this negative circuitous route easement will apply in both directions.​

I think I'm right in saying that Chiltern are expected to reach Oxford some time next year.

The usual points will apply about this not affecting anyone travelling on a through service, or on the shortest route to their destination.

 

[swt_passenger]

I've read a lot of these posts, but I don't really understand what 700598 above is getting at? Any chance you could elaborate?

 

[Paul Kelly]

I suspect this is something to do with Hyndland not being a timing point. As Hyndland East Junction is a timing point, and everything through Hyndland goes through it, I'm left wondering if there's a better way to do this.

The usual way would be to add Hyndland East Junction as a secondary TIPLOC for Hyndland in the "Master Station Names" file in the timetable data (the stuff downloadable from data.atoc.org), e.g. as is done for Gloucester Barnwood Junction and Gloucester.

 

[miami]

I've read a lot of these posts, but I don't really understand what 700598 above is getting at? Any chance you could elaborate?

Isn't it simply that an "Oxford-London Any permitted ticket" is really "Oxford-London NOT CHILTERN" ticket?

Or do you mean how they deem Bicester Village to London via High Wycombe is a "roundabout route" despite being shorter than via oxford?

 

[swt_passenger]

Isn't it simply that an "Oxford-London Any permitted ticket" is really "Oxford-London NOT CHILTERN" ticket?

Or do you mean how they deem Bicester Village to London via High Wycombe is a "roundabout route" despite being shorter than via oxford?

The latter mainly. But isn't the expectation that Chiltern's fares via High Wycombe would be less than the existing any permitted, so the any permitted would then have to be OK via High Wycombe as well? Or is that not correct?

 

[miami]

I guess FGW aren't keen on sharing the Any Permitted revenue with Chiltern.

Bicester Village is £60 return in standard (via Oxford/FGW - technically you could use Cross Country from Oxford to Reading I guess)
Bicester North is £57.60 return in standard (via HW/Chiltern)
Oxford £60 return

Not sure why they didn't either keep an Any permitted from Oxford at say £65, and have route Reading for £60 and route High Wycome for £58

This would mean you could go out via Reading to Paddington and back via Wycome, and you wouldn't have the inevitable "Oxford-London any permitted isn't valid on a direct train from Oxford to London" chaos.

I guess anyone with an existing ticket (say a season) would have been able to use Chiltern in that case.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Isn't it simply that an "Oxford-London Any permitted ticket" is really "Oxford-London NOT CHILTERN" ticket?

What on earth is the sense in that? Why not simply add routes to the fares, and introduce some Route High Wycombe ones at a higher price? Are TOCs obsessed with banning people from doing things rather than allowing the passenger to do what they wish and charging a price appropriate to this?

I think this kind of thing has totally lost the plot.

 

[LexyBoy]

How disappointing, yet entirely unsurprising.

Oxford-London Any Permitted will be valid on Chiltern, unless Chiltern price their flow higher. That's not to say that they won't be telling people it's not valid.

What about destinations beyond London though - they will presumably all also require additional routeings to give passengers the option to travel via Wycombe, since it's no longer a direct train.

Not sure why they didn't either keep an Any permitted from Oxford at say £65, and have route Reading for £60 and route High Wycome for £58

Because the industry prefers to prohibit than to promote flexibility. I think that any change to how money is allocated is inevitably going to be challenged by at least one party, so we are stuck with a regressive, protective approach to fares setting. If we had rail concessions rather than franchises - or dare I use the n-word - then the system could be made much more passenger-friendly (and no-one would lose out). </rant>

If this were the plan they could have simply changed the routeing this Spring - then all annual seasons would have moved over by the time the service from Oxford starts.

 

[CyrusWuff]

Tickets between Oxford Parkway, Islip and Bicester Village (formerly Town) and London will be inherently valid on the new service by virtue of the direct train rule.

I believe "Any Permitted" tickets from Oxford should be valid on the P&R bus between Oxford and Water Eaton Park & Ride and then on Chiltern from Oxford Parkway, but I'd have to check mileages to make sure.

 

[miami]

Tickets between Oxford Parkway, Islip and Bicester Village (formerly Town) and London will be inherently valid on the new service by virtue of the direct train rule.

So the direct train rule isn't affected by "easements" in the routing guide?

 

[CyrusWuff]

So the direct train rule isn't affected by "easements" in the routing guide?

Not as far as I know...And that's also backed up by Condition 13 of the NRCoC:

13. The route you are entitled to take

• You may travel between the stations shown on the ticket you hold in:
  • a train on which you are able to make your entire journey without changing trains;
  • trains which take the shortest route which can be used by scheduled passenger services; or
  • trains which take the routes shown in the National Routeing Guide.
  If you ask them to, the Ticket Seller must advise you on whether your intended route is valid with your ticket.
• If you are using a Zonal Ticket you may travel in trains which take any route within the zone or zones shown on the ticket.
• Together, the routes referred to in (a) (ii), (a) (iii) and (b) above are the "permitted routes"
• The use of some tickets may be restricted to trains which take:
  • routes passing through, or avoiding, particular locations; or
  • the most direct route.
  These restrictions will be shown on the ticket.
• If you make your journey by a route other than those referred to in (a) and (b) above, you will be liable to pay an excess fare. This excess fare will be the difference between the price paid for the ticket you hold and the price of the lowest priced ticket(s) available at a ticket office for immediate travel that would have entitled you to travel by that route.

Seems pretty definitive to me...And the Routeing Guide itself says you don't need to look at the easements until after you've determined the set of (potential) permitted routes, and that you don't need to use the Guide for direct trains or shortest routes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I get the impression that's not how most of the planners are implemented. That being the case, any legal eagles fancy a test case?

 

[Andrew1395]

I think this is about Chiltern wanting to prevent Great Western sharing revenue from tickets used over the new link. Of course what they really want is. the Any Permitted fares to be re designated route Didcot and the users of the new Marylebone Oxfords to be priced on route High Wycombe. I expect the any permitted fares will be higher priced than the new route High Wycombe fares and automatically valid on the new services. Expect the any permitted fares to disappear by next May.