National Routeing Guide update

[infobleep]

STRATFORD U GROUP (G72) and Northampton (NMP) - added sequence 'BB+SM'​

This adds a route via Birmingham.
It goes Stratford-Warwick-Birmingham-Rugby-Northampton, so isn't an especially convenient route.

Is there a good reason why they would want to add an inconvenient route?

 

[yorkie]

It is worth reminding forum users that the responsibility for route permissions lies with the flow owner of the ticket concerned. ATOC administers the RG on their behalf but any issues you have with a change of routeing should be directed to the TOC flow owner.

When Virgin told ATOC to remove all permitted routes between Sheffield & London, except those via the Midland Mainline, why did ATOC/RSP go ahead with that, without consulting the other Train Companies and without permission from the DfT? Flows priced by East Coast (via Doncaster) and LM/XC (via Tamworth) were invalidated as a result of this illegal action.

ATOC/RSP made the changes against the wishes of, and without the knowledge of, any of the other TOCs concerned.

The 'Any Permitted' flow owner had their fares invalidated by a request by a TOC who had no right to have any say in the matter.

 

[Bletchleyite]

When Virgin told ATOC to remove all permitted routes between Sheffield & London, except those via the Midland Mainline, why did ATOC/RSP go ahead with that, without consulting the other Train Companies and without permission from the DfT? Flows priced by East Coast (via Doncaster) and LM/XC (via Tamworth) were invalidated as a result of this illegal action.

Is it not the case that if you have a specified geographical route and there is no Permitted Route that goes that way, in the manner of London you make it up of the Permitted Routes to and from that point?

 

[Merseysider]

Is it not the case that if you have a specified geographical route and there is no Permitted Route that goes that way, in the manner of London you make it up of the Permitted Routes to and from that point?

Yes, correct. For example, if there were a ticket Liverpool to London "via Sheffield" you would work out permitted routes LIV-SHF, and then permitted routes SHF-STP.

Same principle applies for any other ticket where the specified geographical route is not on a 'permitted' route.

Oh, how simple our ticketing system is

 

[Starmill]

Is it not the case that if you have a specified geographical route and there is no Permitted Route that goes that way, in the manner of London you make it up of the Permitted Routes to and from that point?

It sounds like you have misunderstood - you might not have been quite so 'informed' as you are know that you know all of us back when it happened

For a few days, the only mapped routes between Sheffield and London were via the Midland Main Line. This meant that via Tamworth and even via Retford was no longer a permitted route for a time. This also meant that tickets routed LM & XC ONLY were unable to be retailed at all, because the journey was impossible to make using their trains. Informed sources suggested that a number of passengers had made use of Sheffield to London tickets via Tamworth on Virgin Trains services - which was and still is perfectly permitted but that they disliked it. The only geographically routed tickets from Sheffield to London are 'Via Chesterfield' - which was the only route that remained permitted!

 

[miami]

When Virgin told ATOC to remove all permitted routes between Sheffield & London, except those via the Midland Mainline, why did ATOC/RSP go ahead with that, without consulting the other Train Companies and without permission from the DfT? Tickets priced by East Coast (via Doncaster) and LM/XC (via Tamworth) were invalidated as a result of this illegal action. ATOC made the changes against the wishes of, and without the knowledge of, any of the other TOCs concerned.

Did the DFT hold them to account? What penalty did they get?

 

[yorkie]

Is it not the case that if you have a specified geographical route and there is no Permitted Route that goes that way, in the manner of London you make it up of the Permitted Routes to and from that point?

The routes were 'Any Permitted', which is mostly used for people travelling what is often the quickest route, and offers later journey opportunities, via Doncaster, and 'LM/XC', which would have to be used via Tamworth (and, optionally Birmingham) however Virgin Trains decreed that people should only use the Midland Mainline. ATOC agreed, the DfT were not asked, so it was an illegal act. But the rail industry gets away with this sort of thing.

Did the DFT hold them to account? What penalty did they get?

As far as I am aware, no they did not. There was no penalty. There is no effective enforcement!

 

[Andrew1395]

It sounds like you have misunderstood - you might not have been quite so 'informed' as you are know that you know all of us back when it happened

For a few days, the only mapped routes between Sheffield and London were via the Midland Main Line. This meant that via Tamworth and even via Retford was no longer a permitted route for a time. This also meant that tickets routed LM & XC ONLY were unable to be retailed at all, because the journey was impossible to make using their trains. Informed sources suggested that a number of passengers had made use of Sheffield to London tickets via Tamworth on Virgin Trains services - which was and still is perfectly permitted but that they disliked it. The only geographically routed tickets from Sheffield to London are 'Via Chesterfield' - which was the only route that remained permitted!

I will check the original Routeing a Guide but from memory the only mapped routes were on map MM via Chesterfield, need to get the guide out of the loft when getting the Christmas decorations down.

 

[Paul Kelly]

I will check the original Routeing a Guide but from memory the only mapped routes were on map MM via Chesterfield, need to get the guide out of the loft when getting the Christmas decorations down.

I'll go one better than that; I happen to have my copy of the 1952 Book of Routes to hand since I was showing it to someone the other day. For London to Sheffield it says the available routes are:

• King's Cross and Sheffield Victoria via Retford
• Marylebone and Sheffield Victoria via Pinner and Beighton
• St. Pancras and Sheffield Midland via Kettering and Chesterfield Midland

The Book of Routes seems in my opinion to be stricter than the system of reasonable routes which subsequently developed (and which is reflected in the current Routeing Guide); nevertheless the route from King's Cross via Retford certainly appears to be a very historic one.

 

[infobleep]

I'll go one better than that; I happen to have my copy of the 1952 Book of Routes to hand since I was showing it to someone the other day. For London to Sheffield it says the available routes are:

• King's Cross and Sheffield Victoria via Retford
• Marylebone and Sheffield Victoria via Pinner and Beighton
• St. Pancras and Sheffield Midland via Kettering and Chesterfield Midland

The Book of Routes seems in my opinion to be stricter than the system of reasonable routes which subsequently developed (and which is reflected in the current Routeing Guide); nevertheless the route from King's Cross via Retford certainly appears to be a very historic one.

I would love to get hold of book such as that.

Once passed up on a hard back directory of railway stations from the 50s. Only £20. Should have got it. Had all the information about services they offered.

 

[Andrew1395]

I'll go one better than that; I happen to have my copy of the 1952 Book of Routes to hand since I was showing it to someone the other day. For London to Sheffield it says the available routes are:

• King's Cross and Sheffield Victoria via Retford
• Marylebone and Sheffield Victoria via Pinner and Beighton
• St. Pancras and Sheffield Midland via Kettering and Chesterfield Midland

The Book of Routes seems in my opinion to be stricter than the system of reasonable routes which subsequently developed (and which is reflected in the current Routeing Guide); nevertheless the route from King's Cross via Retford certainly appears to be a very historic one.

Interesting as that reflected the pre nationalisation situation with the old LNEr Great Central master cutler route to Marylebone and a GN division route from Victoria to KGX. Of course rationalisation by BR saw the inter city routes concentrated on the Midland Mainline from Sheffield Midland. With The Marylebone route cut back to Nottingham Victoria by 1966. The proposal to close St Pancras envisaged the Sheffield services going into a Kings Cross. An option considered with East Coast electrification. The route to Euston via Tamworth is however absent from both 1952 and the 1997 Routeing Guide.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Consulting my Routeing Guide dated 13/08/1996, I can see that Sheffield to London had the following maps shown as valid:

MM

PS + ER


MM allowed travel straight down the MML via Derby or Nottingham or Direct.

PS + ER allowed travel across to Doncaster / Retford / Grantham / Peterborough and down the ECML into Kings Cross or from Peterborough via Ely and Cambridge to Liverpool Street.

 

[kieron]

Is there a good reason why they would want to add an inconvenient route?

I don't know. I only pointed it out because it was a journey which was changed to be valid via Birmingham, but not via Henley-in-Arden.

It did seem strange to be adding a Birmingham route to Stratford-Northampton (even an indirect one), while at the same time removing them all from Stratford-Milton Keynes.

I've had a look at the maps, and making Stratford-Northampton valid on BI+SM would allow the route via Henley (which NRE tends to give as the fastest route) without extending the validity of a Stratford-Northampton season ticket anywhere else.

The route via Kenilworth may become more attractive once Kenilworth station reopens (with the extra trains that brings), but that's an issue for then.

 

[Andrew1395]

Is there a via Birmingham fare to Northampton, but not to Milton Keynes?

 

[infobleep]

I don't know. I only pointed it out because it was a journey which was changed to be valid via Birmingham, but not via Henley-in-Arden.

It did seem strange to be adding a Birmingham route to Stratford-Northampton (even an indirect one), while at the same time removing them all from Stratford-Milton Keynes.

I've had a look at the maps, and making Stratford-Northampton valid on BI+SM would allow the route via Henley (which NRE tends to give as the fastest route) without extending the validity of a Stratford-Northampton season ticket anywhere else.

The route via Kenilworth may become more attractive once Kenilworth station reopens (with the extra trains that brings), but that's an issue for then.

Thanks. One thing I've learnt in this forum is that the quickest journey time isn't necessarily the one rail companies would like you to make.

 

[kieron]

Is there a via Birmingham fare to Northampton, but not to Milton Keynes?

No. There is an "Any Permitted" one for Northampton, but not Milton Keynes or Wolverton. All three have a "via Coventry" one.

I notice that easement 30038 reads "Journeys routed Coventry may travel via Dorridge", but either this is overridden by something else for these routes, or it isn't used at all. That's the case on NRE and Assertis- and Trainline-based sites, anyway.

 

[Paul Kelly]

That is a fare route easement - it is only considered if a route is otherwise permitted but doesn't go via Coventry, then if it goes via Dorridge instead it is permitted. So e.g. it would theoretically validate an itinerary via Dorridge, Birmingham, Nuneaton and Rugby (avoiding Coventry), if that were a permitted route - but it isn't.

Fare route easements have no effect on the permitted routes for a journey, strangely enough, despite being located in the routeing guide - logically they really should be part of the fares data.

 

[kieron]

Thanks for the explanation.

There was another update to the fares guide yesterday.

New dataset RJRG0389 published 16 December 2015

Following reports that journeys on the 17 January between Leicester and Liverpool via Sheffield were not showing in journey planners due to an engineering works diversion from the normal route. To resolve this issue, three maps have had a link added between Chinley and Manchester (G20) Routeing Points.

Map changed

Map AM - EAST ANGLIA TO MANCHESTER VIA PETERBOROUGH AND SHEFFIELD changed (1 added/ 0 removed links)


Map HV - BARNETBY TO LIVERPOOL VIA SHEFFIELD & HOPE VALLEY LINE changed (1 added/ 0 removed links)

Map PR - MIDLAND MAIN LINE ROUTES TO MANCHESTER AND PRESTON VIA SHEFFIELD changed (1 added/ 0 removed links)​

This means there are now 6 maps with a link between Chinley and Manchester (usually via Reddish North, Romiley and Marple), and 4 which include both stations, but only include a route between them via Guide Bridge (HD, HO and YL) or Stockport (GM).

In terms of route validity, it has no effect on some routes, and allows others via Reddish North where this was not previously an option. I don't think it does any more than that, as all of these already had routes both via Stockport and via Guide Bridge.

A review of map permissions between East lancashire and south Yorkshire has resulted in the following changes

Map sequence added

Accrington (ACR) and Meadowhall (MHS) - added sequence 'DP+YK'
Accrington (ACR) and Swinton (South Yorks) (SWN) - added sequence 'DP+YK'

Map sequence removed

Accrington (ACR) and Meadowhall (MHS) - removed sequence 'NP+YK'
Accrington (ACR) and Swinton (South Yorks) (SWN) - removed sequence 'NP+YK'​

These add mapped routes via Mirfield (actually Huddersfield Group, but you can only enter and leave it via Mirfield), and ones via Reddish North.

Blackburn (BBN) and Meadowhall (MHS) - added sequence 'DP+YK'
Blackburn (BBN) and Meadowhall (MHS) - removed sequence 'NP+YK'​

This adds some mapped routes via Mirfield.
It also adds ones via Darwen, Wigan and Reddish North.

Blackburn (BBN) and Swinton (South Yorks) (SWN) - added sequence 'DP+YK'
Blackburn (BBN) and Swinton (South Yorks) (SWN) - removed sequence 'NP+YK'​

This adds mapped routes via Mirfield.
It also adds ones via Reddish North and either Wigan or Preston.

For engineering work the following temporary easement has been published impacting journeys from Roydon to/via London Liverpool Street

Easement added

700603: Due to engineering works that will close the London bound platform at Roydon (Essex) between 02 January 2016 and 28 February 2016, this positive doubleback easement will allow journeys from Roydon to and onward via London Liverpool Street to doubleback at Harlow Town. The platform for journeys to Roydon from London is not affected by these works, and therefore the easement applies in only the London bound direction​

There are times when all trains are replaced by buses, and other times when southbound trains are cancelled without replacement. If this easement is intended only to affect journeys via London Liverpool Street, or journeys to or via London, it seems rather unfortunate for anyone travelling to Roydon from further north.

 

[Starmill]

Two very interesting FoI replies have been published today:

In response to the question of why Chesham was removed from the Pink Pages

According to Department for Transport (DfT) records we have not been asked to make any
change to the Routeing Guide in relation to Chesham. Journeys from Chesham always go
via Chalfont & Latimer so journey planners will pick up the permissions that apply for that
station when enquiries are made from Chesham.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/304957/response/747165/attach/html/4/F0013084.pdf.html

In response to a more general question about the authorisation of permitted route changes during November and December 2015

I can confirm that the Department for Transport (DfT) has not authorised any Routeing
Guide changes during the period specified.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/changes_to_the_national_routeing?post_redirect=1

Hmm!

 

[sheff1]

Two very interesting FoI replies have been published today:

In response to the question of why Chesham was removed from the Pink Pages

I am confused. The FOI request says Chesham was listed as a Routeing Point in the original Routeing Guide. It certainly isn't listed as one in the copy I have and I don't recall it ever being a Routeing Point.

 

[furlong]

So, how did Chesham get removed from the public document without the DfT's approval and what will the DfT do to ensure this situation is rectified?

In response to a more general question about the authorisation of permitted route changes during November and December 2015

So perhaps the DfT might explain what action it will take to find and reverse all the alterations, if any, that have been made with neither the consultation nor consent required by law, and consider how to compensate the victims? (Followed by proper consultation and approval if the various changes are still desired.) The ORR might also seek evidence to support prosecutions of TOCs/RSP if they consider there might have been unauthorised manipulation designed to encourage any groups of passengers to pay more than legally necessary.

The approval process is not difficult to follow, and previous FOI requests have shown that most requests for changes are sensible and receive approval - but that isn't an excuse to take short-cuts!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I am confused. The FOI request says Chesham was listed as a Routeing Point in the original Routeing Guide. It certainly isn't listed as one in the copy I have and I don't recall it ever being a Routeing Point.

It's not a routeing point itself, no, but the way the routeing guide is written, it has to be listed in the table as associated with specific routeing points, otherwise only the shortest route may be used, which causes problems for longer-distance journeys.

 

[The Quincunx]

Mountains; molehills. Haven't DfT said previously that they only need to approve changes that remove a previously permitted route, and that they do not need to approve mere changes to maps or routeing points? And surely if an actual permitted route is accidentally removed without DfT consent, won't it be put back if it's pointed out to ATOC??

 

[kieron]

Some more changes were published on Friday.

New dataset RJRG0390 published 18 December 2015

To provide alternative permitted routes for tickets priced on Route not via London, between Norwich and Tottenham Hale the following change has been published.

Map sequence added

Norwich (NRW) and Tottenham Hale (TOM) - added sequence 'AB+WA'​

This adds some routes which go via Cambridge and not via London.
Previously, the only route which avoided London was one via Ipswich and Stratford.

To provide temporary permitted routes during engineering works at Christmas and New Year, (that affect routes to Gatwick Airport).

Easement added

700604: During engineering works between the 27 December 2015 and 03 January 2016, affecting routes from London to Gatwick Airport; this map easement will allow journey planners to show journeys via Horsham, Dorking, Leatherhead, Sutton (Surrey) and Wimbledon. This easement applies in both directions.​

This apparently gives journey planners permission to show tickets from somewhere to somewhere else as being valid on a route which avoids part of the Brighton Main Line (among other places). I don't know what a passenger who wasn't able to visit a TOC web site before travelling would be allowed to do, however.

To accomodate the closure of a platform at Roydon (Essex) this easement is for journeys to Roydon from the Cambridge direction.

Easement added

700605: Due to engineering works the London bound platform at Roydon (Essex) will be closed between 02 January 2016 and 28 February 2016. this positive local easement will allow journeys to Roydon from the Cambridge direction to doubleback between Roydon and Broxbourne. The platform for journeys toward Cambridge is not affected by these works, and therefore this easement applies in only the Cambridge bound direction.​

The first sentence here gives people travelling south to Roydon the same opportunity to double back by one station which 700603 now gives to those travelling south from Roydon. The second sentence contradicts this. I don't think there's a sense in which "Cambridge bound" means "from Cambridge".

To clarify the previously published easement for journeys toward London from Roydon during the closure of the platform has been amended

Easement changed

700603: Due to engineering works the London bound platform at Roydon (Essex) will be closed between 02 January 2016 and 28 February 2016. This positive local easement will allow journeys in the London direction from Roydon to or via Broxbourne to doubleback between Roydon and Harlow Town. The platform for journeys to Roydon from London is not affected by these works, and therefore the easement applies in only the London bound direction​

The easement now affects all journeys from or via Broxbourne.
It's also changed from a "doubleback" easement to a "local" easement. I don't know what effect this is intended to have.

Engineering work completed.

Easement removed

700581: Customers travelling from or via London Kings Cross to Edinburgh and beyond may travel via Carlisle during engineering works on the 14th November, 21st November, 28th November and 5th December 2015, north of Newcastle. This positive map easement applies in both directions.​

In the past now, as it says.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
In response to one of the last few posts, I'd say:

Two very interesting FoI replies have been published today:

In response to the question of why Chesham was removed from the Pink Pages

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/304957/response/747165/attach/html/4/F0013084.pdf.html

I'd be happy with that. If I had a Amersham-wherever ticket, I'd know I could use it between Amersham and Chalfont Latimer, as well as anywhere else a Chalfont-wherever ticket was valid.

It would be nice if all of the information needed to determine the permitted routes for a ticket was collected together somewhere, but you're not going to get that with a FOI request.

In response to a more general question about the authorisation of permitted route changes during November and December 2015

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/changes_to_the_national_routeing?post_redirect=1

It may be worthwhile to upload a copy of that request, but to put "2015" in the various places where it has "2016".

 

[Starmill]

As the annotation points out, the answer is very cryptic. Maybe they are saying that they have authorised no changes to take place in November and December 2016?

 

[kieron]

As the annotation points out, the answer is very cryptic. Maybe they are saying that they have authorised no changes to take place in November and December 2016?

Either that, or that no event which would constitute them authorising a change to the routeing guide has yet happened in November 2016 or December 2016.

I don't think it's the answer to the question Mr Izzac intended to ask, whatever it is.

On another topic, a couple of changes have been made to temporary easements this afternoon:

New dataset RJRG0391 published 24 December 2015

To ensure Journey Planning systems apply the easement a change has een made to the electronic data

700604: During engineering works between the 27 December 2015 and 03 January 2016, affecting routes from London to Gatwick Airport\u037e this map easement will allow journey planners to show journeys via Horsham, Dorking, Leatherhead, Sutton (Surrey) and wimbledon. This easement applies in both directions.​

No change to the text.

To ensure Journey Planning systems allow the local doubleback during this engineering works, electronic data has been amended. A corerection to the text has also been made.



700605: Due to engineering works the London bound platform at Roydon (Essex) will be closed between 02 January 2016 and 28 February 2016. this positive local easement will allow journeys to Roydon from the Cambridge direction to doubleback between Roydon and Broxbourne. The platform for journeys toward Cambridge is not affected by these works, and therefore this easement applies in only the London bound direction.​

The third-to-last word has changed from "Cambridge" to "London".

 

[kieron]

Some more changes to easements were made yesterday, although there isn't a summary on the ATOC site yet.

Some easements for completed engineering works were removed:

700586 During engineering works between Slough and London Paddington on the 27 and 28 December 2015, First Great Western services will be diverted at Reading via Basingstoke and Woking to London Waterloo. This map easement will create temporary permitted routes to allow for this diversion. the easement operates in both directions.

700587 During engineering works between Slough and London Paddington on the 27 and 28 December 2015, First Great Western services will be diverted at Didcot Parkway via Banbury and High Wycombe to London Marylebone. This map easement will create temporary permitted routes to allow for this diversion. the easement operates in both directions.

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.

700591 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 Fare Route easement will override the routeing restrictions of the quote fare routes. This easement will operate in both directions

700599 During engineering works on Sundays 12 December 2015 and 03 January 2016. From 23.25 hrs on the preceding Saturdays, all day Sunday to 04.55 hrs on the following Mondays, 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.

700604 During engineering works between the 27 December 2015 and 03 January 2016, affecting routes from London to Gatwick Airport; this map easement will allow journey planners to show journeys via Horsham, Dorking, Leatherhead, Sutton (Surrey) and wimbledon. This easement applies in both directions.​

As were some other easements:

030156 For journeys to Pokesdown and Christchurch via Southampton Central may doubleback from Bournmouth. This easement applies in both directions​

This reduces the number of journey opportunities for routes such as Christchurch-Reading, but I don't know if this is a particular problem for anyone.

700546 To allow travel from Frodsham to Winsford via Chester and Crewe, this easement overrides the fares checking rules. This easement applies in both directions​

This was an easement which was the same as easement 700551, except that this was a "routeing point" easement and that is a "local" one. Why there were two easements to permit someone to use the shortest route between these two stations remains a mystery to me.

Some temporary easements were added:

700606 During weekend engineering works, from the 09 January 2016 to 03 April 2016, journeys to Cardiff from stations on the line to Ebbw Vale will need to go via Newport (S Wales). This positive Local easement will permit a doubleback between Pye Corner and Newport (S Wales). This easement applies in both directions

700607 During weekend engineering works, from 09 January 2016 to 03 April 2016, journeys on the line from Ebbw Vale Town to destinations via Cardiff Central will be routed via Newport (S Wales). This positive Routeing Point easement will allow journey planners to show journeys that doubleback between Newport (S Wales) and Pye Corner and onward to Cardiff Central. This easement applies in both directions.​

Two more nearly identical easements (although one is "to Cardiff" and the other "via").

The timetable doesn't indicate that any trains between Cardiff and Newport pass through Pye Corner. It may say somewhere else, but at the moment I don't know if these easements will actually affect any journeys.

Looking beyond these easements, I notice that the timetable doesn't list a distance between the Ebbw Vale line and Newport (even though it does list the diverted trains) so I can't calculate the route distance for a train via Newport. The NFM64 data doesn't list fares between the Ebbw Vale line and anywhere, so I can't determine which routeing points are valid for a ticket.

I can't see any easements which would allow a journey to stations on the line which doesn't involve a double back between Newport and Pye Corner before going to Cardiff.

Because of this, I don't think I am currently able to calculate a permitted route for a ticket between stations on the Ebbw Vale line and stations beyond Newport (where the trains terminate) on any of the affected weekends.

700608 During engineering works on the 13 & 14 February 2016; 08 May 2016 and 15 May 2016, affecting the line between Romsey & Warminster, journeys on the route between Portsmouth and South Wales using fare routes 00618 VIA SALISBURY and 00837 VIA WESTBURY & SALISBURY will be valid for journeys via Reading. This easement applies in both directions.

700609 During engineering work on the 16 and 17 Januray that will close the route via Newbury for journeys between London Paddington and the West Country, journeys using fare route 00063 VIA NEWBURY will be able to travel via Swindon. This fare route easement applies in both directions​

More engineering work.

Finally, easement 700331 has been changed from

Customers travelling via Severn Tunnel Junction to Barnt Green may double back via University. This easement applies in both directions.​

to

Customers travelling from or via Cheltenham Spa to Barnt Green may double back via University (Birmingham). This easement applies in both directions.​

So it now benefits journeys from stations between Cheltenham and Caldicot, doesn't benefit journeys via Hereford, and definitely doesn't let you travel to Coleraine and back.

 

[Tetchytyke]

As the annotation points out, the answer is very cryptic. Maybe they are saying that they have authorised no changes to take place in November and December 2016?

It's not that cryptic; the department have not authorised any changes in the period specified. That will, of course, be because the period specified has yet to occur.

Bear in mind that FOI officers should only answer the question asked. They cannot suggest other questions that you might like to ask instead. Mr Izzac got the answer to his question. He will now need to resubmit the question for the period he actually intended.

 

[kieron]

Another update was published yesterday. It adds a station and does something with some temporary easements.

New dataset RJRG0392 published 14 January 2016

Station added to data

Apperley Bridge (APY) has been added​

This is associated with Bradford, Hellifield and Leeds, as you would expect.
There are no fares for it in the NFM64 file, but it does seem to have been added to the unpublished fare list journey planners use for the fare check.

As a result of diversions due to flood damage between Lockerbie and Motherwell, an easement to assist Journey Planners has been published.

Easement added

700610: Due to flood damage, sleeper services to Aberdeen, Inverness and Fort William during January 2016 are subject to diversions in Scotland. This map easement will aid journey planners find journeys and will apply in both directions.

Electronic data amended to assist Journey planners show services.

Easement changed

700605: Due to engineering works the London bound platform at Roydon (Essex) will be closed between 02 January 2016 and 28 February 2016. this positive local easement will allow journeys to Roydon from the Cambridge direction to doubleback between Roydon and Broxbourne. The platform for journeys toward Cambridge is not affected by these works, and therefore this easement applies in only the London bound direction.

700606: During weekend engineering works, from the 09 January 2016 to 03 April 2016, journeys to Cardiff from stations on the line to Ebbw Vale will need to go via Newport (S Wales). This positive Local easement will permit a doubleback between Pye Corner and Newport (S Wales). This easement applies in both directions

700607: During weekend engineering works, from 09 January 2016 to 03 April 2016, journeys on the line from Ebbw Vale Town to destinations via Cardiff Central will be routed via Newport (S Wales). This positive Routeing Point easement will allow journey planners to show journeys that doubleback between Newport (S Wales) and Pye Corner and onward to Cardiff Central. This easement applies in both directions.​

So that's one new easement, and three changed ones. And not one word about how any of these changes affect passengers.

 

[trivran]

Customers travelling from or via Cheltenham Spa to Barnt Green may double back via University (Birmingham). This easement applies in both directions.​

So it now benefits journeys from stations between Cheltenham and Caldicot, doesn't benefit journeys via Hereford, and definitely doesn't let you travel to Coleraine and back.

I can only assume by your comment that some clever clogs was using it to travel to and from NI. Much as I enjoy a good cheap ticket that does rather take the biscuit.

 

[PermitToTravel]

I'm sure kieron was joking about Coleraine. It wouldn't be accepted on the ferry and you'd be told where to go if presenting it on a train there.