NRE weird behaviour cross-London

[splashsquelch]

Hello,

I am somewhat confused by the fares not shown for Clapham Junction to Cambridge, anytime day return (or any other type for that matter):

http://ojp.nationalrail.co.uk/servi...200/arr/tomorrow/1730/dep?excludeslowertrains

Why are there so many gaps in the outward fares especially? It is making it very hard to understand if those trains are not permitted on an any permitted ticket (surely not), or if there is no '+ London' option, or something more cryptic. I can get fares ok from Kings Cross itself, but I would prefer one through ticket, as this is for business and explanations are better avoided!

Many thanks.

 

[Hadders]

For some reason it doesn't seem to show a fare when the journey involves changing at Vauxhall.

In any case, an Anytime Day Return from CLJ to CBG is £34.60. This is valid by any train from CLJ into London, across London on the Underground and then from either Kings Cross or Liverpool Street to Cambridge (the service from Kings Cross being quickest). There are no time restrictions on this ticket.

If your outward journey from CLJ commences after 0930 then an off-peak day return at £27.00 will suffice. It is valid on routes as detailed above. There are no time restrictions in the return portion.

 

[splashsquelch]

For some reason it doesn't seem to show a fare when the journey involves changing at Vauxhall.

Ok, that helps. If I tell it avoid VXH, it behaves. That seems like a programming error to me, and a bad one!

 

[furlong]

If anyone believes Clapham Junction to Cambridge via Vauxhall and Kings Cross was allowed pre-privatisation then I suggest they invoke the so-called disputed routeing procedure...

 

[ASharpe]

There are no mapped routes via Vauxhall in the routeing guide, so could there be some strangeness in it's attempts to find the shortest route (or less than 3 miles over)?

Fares via Victoria are shown.

 

[furlong]

There are no mapped routes via Vauxhall in the routeing guide, so could there be some strangeness in it's attempts to find the shortest route (or less than 3 miles over)?

Fares via Victoria are shown.

The 2002 Routeing Guide allows travel Clapham Jn to Cambridge via LONDON GROUP, and Clapham Jn to LONDON GROUP includes travel to Waterloo via Vauxhall.

So if the current version no longer allows that, when was the removal of that route approved and why?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

There are no mapped routes via Vauxhall in the routeing guide, so could there be some strangeness

Well looking at the version of the routeing guide currently on the ATOC website, all mapped routes for this journey seem to go through Denmark Hill! (You can no longer travel on a mapped route from Clapham Junction to Victoria or to Waterloo via Vauxhall.) So travel this way now relies on the protection afforded to the 'shortest' route!

 

[Hadders]

I've no idea what's gone on with NRE but travel via the Victoria Line from Vauxhall to Kings Cross (or Finsbury Park) is perfectly logical and often the fastest way to cross London.

My suspicion is it's something to do with the way that the cross London journey has been programmed into NRE. I can't see anything in the 'crossing London with tickets marked +' part of NRE that suggests you can't use the Victoria Line to/from Vauxhall.

 

[maniacmartin]

So travel this way now relies on the protection afforded to the 'shortest' route!

The shortest route according to the NRG and RJIS for London Terminals to Cambridge is Greater Anglia out of Liverpool Street..

So, from Clapham Junction, the route via Kings Cross may only be valid due to the '3 mile rule' in the Routeing Guide in detail

 

[Tetchytyke]

My suspicion is it's something to do with the way that the cross London journey has been programmed into NRE

Must be. East Coast will sell you the ticket via Vauxhall. All journeys will send you via Kings Cross.

 

[ASharpe]

Kings Cross to Cambridge is 57 mi 38 ch
Liverpool Street to Cambridge is 55 mi 52 ch

so kingscross is 1mi 66ch further

Clapham Junction to:
Victoria is 2 mi 59 ch
Vauxhall 2 mi 45 ch
Waterloo 3mi 74ch

Waterloo is 1mi 29ch further

So Going via Waterloo and Kings Cross is not valid any more - but would have been a few months ago when I last downloaded the Routeing Guide.

 

[maniacmartin]

Another fall-out from this change is Clapham Junction to Ashford Intl.

NRE shows the fastest route as changing at Vauxhall onto the Victoria line, then taking HS1 from St Pancras. But it apparently needs 2 tickets.
So the +ANY PERMITTED doesn't give you anything over the +NOT VALID ON HS1

 

[Hadders]

The shortest route according to the NRG and RJIS for London Terminals to Cambridge is Greater Anglia out of Liverpool Street..

So, from Clapham Junction, the route via Kings Cross may only be valid due to the '3 mile rule' in the Routeing Guide in detail

Cambridge and Clapham Juntion are both routeing points. The permitted routes are 'London' and maps 'EL+KE'

Clapham Junction to London is valid via a multitude of London Terminals. London to Cambridge is valid from Kings Cross or Liverpool Street.

Vauxhall is an appropriate place for interchanging with the Underground to cross London so I can only assume that NRE is wrong in not offering a ticket for the journey interchanging there.

 

[splashsquelch]

Kings Cross to Cambridge is 57 mi 38 ch
Liverpool Street to Cambridge is 55 mi 52 ch

so kingscross is 1mi 66ch further

Clapham Junction to:
Victoria is 2 mi 59 ch
Vauxhall 2 mi 45 ch
Waterloo 3mi 74ch

Waterloo is 1mi 29ch further

So Going via Waterloo and Kings Cross is not valid any more - but would have been a few months ago when I last downloaded the Routeing Guide.

But NRE's routes which it displays but refuses fares for are not via Waterloo, they are CLJ -> VXH -> (Vic line) -> KGX. This looks like the extra distance is only the 1mi 66ch for using KGX instead of LST (because actually going to VIC is longer than going to VHX).

...my point being that if I understand correctly, it should not be the distance rule that prevents going CLJ-VXH-(underground)-KGX-CBG.

 

[furlong]

Clapham Junction to London is valid via a multitude of London Terminals.

But only if Denmark Hill was travelled through en-route to one of those terminals.

This is the change we are disputing. What did Passenger Focus say about it, or is it yet another unapproved ATOC "mistake"?

CLJ to LONDON GROUP

2002: Maps LB LK PD SC WX

2014: Maps PK+VL i.e. via Denmark Hill (or Elephant & Castle?) - the journey must involve at least one segment on both maps

(I don't think it's of any relevance here, but Vauxhall was not a member of London Group in 2002, but is in 2014.)

 

[Paul Kelly]

Don't forget that NRE doesn't apportion zero distance to Underground transfers; it has "secret" mileages that it uses for those. I've done a very rough calculation, too rough too lay out here, but it looks to me that the difference between the CLJ-VXH-KGX mileage compared to the CLJ-VIC-LST mileage is 1m17ch, which when added to the 1m66ch difference from KGX-CBG, adds up to 3m3ch, i.e. 3 chains over.

So perhaps the Jeppesen IPTIS implementation of the Routeing Guide (used by National Rail Enquiries) is applying the 3 mile cut-off strictly, whereas the implementation used by WebTIS engines is applying a margin of error and the extra 3 chains is OK.

Still, this is arguing over a silly point of detail and making use of information that's not publicly available; it really should be a mapped route to remove any doubt.

 

[ASharpe]

Don't forget that NRE doesn't apportion zero distance to Underground transfers; it has "secret" mileages that it uses for those.

I didn't know that, how secret are these mileages?

it really should be a mapped route to remove any doubt.

I think everyone would agree with that.

 

[Paul Kelly]

You can check the "secret" mileages on an experimental website I made a few years ago, and haven't kept very up-to-date, e.g.
Vauxhall to Kings Cross:
http://brroutes.com/mileage/#query?o=VXH&d=KGX&mi=0&ch=0
Victoria to Liverpool Street:
http://brroutes.com/mileage/#query?o=VIC&d=LST&mi=0&ch=0

The routes shown don't make much sense in these cases, but I think they are ignored by the booking engines - it's just the overall mileage figure that matters (and which is used as a pseudo-mileage for Underground links).

 

[furlong]

it really should be a mapped route to remove any doubt.

Well I find it hard to believe that the removal of such obvious mapped routes from Clapham Junction would have been approved in the full knowledge of the change. Wouldn't Passenger Focus, at least, have kicked up a fuss?

And if it transpires that the DfT approved the use of a version of the NRG with these routes removed yet was unaware of (and had neglected to check what it was told about) changes that it was approving, then troubling questions of its competency as regulator of this document arise.

 

[globetrotter]

That (the secret mileages) was fascinating. I entered a route from shall we say "somewhere on the South Coast east of Brighton" to Feltham and brroutes reported:

"136 other routes found within 3 miles 20 chains of shortest route"

What is the significance of the extra 20 chains? Isn't 3 miles the limit? Within limits, it was a bit like having a travelcard within certain areas of south and south west London added on for free, with the possibility of stopping over or starting or ending short.

Seems to me all I have to do is print out the mileages for the particular route I want to take and show if challenged. And the same principle could be employed for any journey where a variety of routes might seem possible.

 

[Paul Kelly]

What is the significance of the extra 20 chains? Isn't 3 miles the limit?

Some booking engines allow a "margin of error" such that routes slightly longer than 3 miles are also permitted under the 3 mile rule; this is officially sanctioned by ATOC I believe. The 20 chains (quarter of a mile) was just a guess at what this threshold might be - you can change it to a straight 3 miles if you want, but it can be interesting to see what routes just miss out.

 

[splashsquelch]

Just for info - I purchased an Anytime Day Return CLJ -> CBG, +Any permitted. It worked both sets of gates at VXH with no problems. So even if the NRE/NRG is slightly insane, the passenger's experience is fine!

 

[yorkie]

Just for info - I purchased an Anytime Day Return CLJ -> CBG, +Any permitted. It worked both sets of gates at VXH with no problems. So even if the NRE/NRG is slightly insane, the passenger's experience is fine!

I agree, but sadly passengers who aren't savvy with what routes they can take will not be offered that route by booking engines.

Also you were technically not on a permitted route, and in theory could have been mistreated by an RPI (in practice, that's unlikely) and you may then have to go through the "Disputed Route Procedure" which requires you to give your name & address. To give you an idea how bonkers this is, you technically committed a 'strict liability' criminal offence!

The rules are insanely stacked up against passengers and ludicrously in favour of the TOCs, with no effective regulation!

 

[furlong]

I agree, but sadly passengers who aren't savvy with what routes they can take will not be offered that route by booking engines.

And with the journey opportunities shifting against FCC, GA might end up with a greater share of the revenue, even though a significant proportion of passengers might be like you and use the ticket on supposedly-illegal routes with FCC.

 

[globetrotter]

I agree, but sadly passengers who aren't savvy with what routes they can take will not be offered that route by booking engines.

Also you were technically not on a permitted route, and in theory could have been mistreated by an RPI (in practice, that's unlikely) and you may then have to go through the "Disputed Route Procedure" which requires you to give your name & address. To give you an idea how bonkers this is, you technically committed a 'strict liability' criminal offence!

The rules are insanely stacked up against passengers and ludicrously in favour of the TOCs, with no effective regulation!

Surely here the route outlined (via Vauxhall) is within 3 miles of the shortest route so in all such cases there is no need to stick to a mapped route (or one shown as valid by journey planners) ... and if the ticket has a Maltese Cross then it is valid for a journey on the Underground?

However in this case travel CLJ to CBG via London Bridge is permitted, therefore a break of journey at Vauxhall is allowed (assuming this ticket allows BOJ, I haven't checked) and the ticket would open the rail barriers.

So would it then not follow one way or another that in this example no strict liability offence would be committed?

An important question ... what if one is following a "within 3 miles" alternative route ... is a break of journey permitted at intermediate points where the route is not along a mapped route, and the ticket (which might be marked "route - any permitted") allows BOJ?

 

[maniacmartin]

Surely here the route outlined (via Vauxhall) is within 3 miles of the shortest route so in all such cases there is no need to stick to a mapped route (or one shown as valid by journey planners)

Itś not that clear that it actually is. See the mileage calculations in the preceeding posts
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

An important question ... what if one is following a "within 3 miles" alternative route ... is a break of journey permitted at intermediate points where the route is not along a mapped route, and the ticket (which might be marked "route - any permitted") allows BOJ?

If the ticket type does not forbid it, BoJ is permitted anywhere on a permitted route, except:
- the Underground leg cannot be resumed
- doubling back within routeing groups is allowed ^for interchange purposes only^

 

[furlong]

You have to pick one permitted route and follow it throughout - you can't take the first part of one permitted route and combine it with the second part of a different one. As soon as you head towards Vauxhall you are committed to using the shortest route i.e. Greater Anglia.

The 3 mile concession only appears in the guidance on how to interpret the routeing guide and I've always viewed it as a sensible level of discretion to deal with rounding errors in mileage calculations.

The Maltese Cross just indicates that one or more of the permitted routes for the journey may involve crossing London. You might have a ticket bearing a Maltese Cross that has no permitted routes through London, or a ticket without a Maltese Cross that is valid through London (without needing to pay extra). The industry has been trying to bring the two into line for many years, but I'm sure examples of each case can still be found.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If the ticket type does not forbid it, BoJ is permitted anywhere on a permitted route, except:
- doubling back within routeing groups is allowed ^for interchange purposes only^

I have never seen this connection - I think people are reading too much into that phrase.

The routeing guide determines the routes - and nothing more. You may select a route that doubles back within a routeing group for interchange purposes (e.g. to change from one railway line to another).

Having selected your route and ticket, NRCoC 16 determines whether you may start, break or end your journey at intermediate stations on that route.