What’s in store for the UK’s big rail fare shake-up
“The Department for Transport recently announced far-reaching changes to UK rail fares in an attempt to make it easier for passengers to buy the cheapest tickets. Trials on selected routes are due to start in May and could lead to the most radical overhaul of the fares system in more than 30 years. In February a set of radical changes were jointly announced by the government and key rail industry bodies as a measure to modernise archaic rail fares and routing structures that hamper passengers from finding the cheapest tickets available.
“The Department for Transport (DfT), together with the Rail Delivery Group (RDG), Transport Focus, Which? and the Office of Rail and Road (ORR), published an all-encompassing Action Plan that promises simplified ticket options, more user-friendly ticket machines, and easier journey planning. The proposals come after long-standing criticism from passenger advocacy groups regarding the highly complex ticket pricing structure, which has become one of the leading causes of passenger dissatisfaction when it comes to UK rail travel.
“Transport Focus’ 2016 National Rail Passenger Survey showed that only 47% of passengers were satisfied with the value for money of their ticket. Satisfaction with value for money by individual routes within train operating companies varied between 33% and 84%.
One thing they do not mention, very noticeably to me, is the other essential to planning a journey in advance – a proper set of timetables.
And I mean realtimetables, not an electronic list-of-stations (etc ad nauseam)
And showing all operators’ trains, too.
This is why, whenever possible I use the still-available on-line NR tt set, rather than trusting the vested interests of the TOC’s
@Greg Tingey
You might like to note that it is National Rail’s Darwin database that are the “real timetables” these days. The PDF creations you are looking at are just printouts.
Darwin publishes the whole days schedule each day as a feed to everyone else to use including National Rail, the train operating companies and people like me who write software.
http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/100296.aspx
Briantist: I am sure you are right about Darwin being the original source of the data which appears elsewhere, including the PDF creations which so please Greg (and doubtless others).
But I read Greg’s “real timetables” as meaning something else – they are the form in which he is accustomed to receiving and interpreting the data (and again this will apply to numerous other people). Yes, they are just one specific presentation of the data – which some people prefer. Obviously it’s good that there is now a choice of presentations, and each one will suit a particular purpose or a particular user. Let a thousand flowers bloom!
@ Malcolm – while not leaping 100% to Greg’s defence I am afraid I struggle a bit with the approach many TOCs take. Now I will readily accept I am an “edge case” in terms of being the “typical TOC passenger” because I have access to ticket discounts that cannot be used via an online booking engine. Therefore the presumption by almost all TOCs that people want to check only specific times for a journey *and* buy a ticket at the same time is not applicable to me. I am much more interesting in knowing the “service offer” regardless of operators because I will almost always have access to “all operators” tickets. I’m afraid I don’t really buy this “thousand flowers blooming” thing – what we have is umpteen different ways to see essentially the same information when we should only really have one standardised, clear, easy to understand format. Plenty of European countries have a mandated format for *all* public transport timetables. We should really have the same.
The multiplicity of ticketing options and the associated almost impenetrable routeing guide (and easements) means it is almost impossible to be confident you have the right ticket at the best price for a defined but flexible route(s). I used to understand BR’s ticketing. I am now a complete dumbo as to what TOC ticket is what and its basic validity.
The last attempt at ticket “simplification” was just sticking new names on old products. Nothing was actually removed or simplified. I am very dubious that this so called “trial” is a meaningful attempt at genuine simplification that won’t be accompanied with some very nasty downsides like the loss of break of journey, flexibility over the duration of return tickets and not having to compulsorily reserve your seat. We are moving slowly but surely away from an affordable “turn up and go” railway for medium or long distance travel and I don’t view that as a good thing *at all*. I also have my suspicions that there will not be full transparency over the trial and its results. DfT have considerable “form” in withholding information and reports that do not suit its wider agenda. The impact on tickets, fares, travel volumes and thus franchise revenues that could arise from this trial make it a very likely candidate for a distinct lack of transparency and that is to no one’s benefit but government.
Braintist
THANK YOU
Malcom
But, the “traditional” timetable contains more information & one can cross-plan & look for alternatives if/when somefink goes worng … which you can’t do with the stripped-down, supposedly “easy-to-use” minimalist presentations usually shown these days.
There’s even a phrase for this process, its called: “Dumbing Down”
@Malcolm
“Let a thousand flowers bloom!”
Very much agreed.