Summer Timetable - Mileages missing ?

[whole diary]

[moonrakerz]

I've just noticed that the May '10 complete timetable doesn't have the route mileages on the first page of each individual timetable.
It may be just because it is described as a "forthcoming" document, I can't remember noticing when the current timetable was first issued.

It may be worth hanging on to the current timetable if you want to keep the mileages - unless there is a another source for them.

[Ollie]

I'm pretty sure the new full timetable has mileages?

<ignore, thought was referring to the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) one>

[JayMac]

The downloadable version from Network Rail is indeed missing the mileages, despite them being referenced in the 'How to use.....' section.

Also Page 1 of the complete timetable .pdf says the timetable runs from Sunday 23rd May 2009!

[brompton rail]

The - for sale - printed version does not have mileages either, as well as loads of missing and / or incorrect trains. According to Barry Doe in "Rail" the editors at Network Rail were not aware that mileages had to be included in the timetable as they are required (by the Rail Regulator) to establish the shortest route (on which in turn 'any permitted' tickets are valid). They are likely to be restored for December 2010.

Should you be tempted to shell out ^16 for the GB^▸ (Great Britain) Timetable please be aware that is is printed in an (approx) A4 portrait style book, with the timetables printed 2 up in landscape mode. Extra thick glasses, strong lighting and probably a magnifying lens would come in handy! The books were delivered to WH Smiths outlets on Wednesday.

[John R]

The presentation is very retrograde step, though presumably it's an attempt to keep the book in one volume without breaking the spine.

Part of the problem is that in trying to group too many services in one table results in a huge number of additional pages. As a good example, if the Cardiff Bay branch was excluded from the Valley Lines table (130), the table would immediately shrink by 20 pages or so IIRC^▸ (if I recall/remember/read correctly).

The use of "and the same minutes at each hour" also seems to have fallen into virtual disuse as well, which was good at keeping table space down. Partly this is as so many local tables also show long distance trains in the same table (eg Peterborough, Stevenage calls in table 25.)

 

[paul7575]

I think the hard copy versions will still include all the errrors found when the online version first came out - as they must have gone to print a few weeks back?

Now some of the online tables have been revised, but as Barry Doe has also said, there will no longer be supplements published during the validity as before, because the base tables will be updated continuously.

Without those supplements that NR^» (Network Rail - home page) put online last time, there'll be no way of correcting the hard copy versions as far as I can see...

Paul

[John R]

Part of the problem is that in trying to group too many services in one table results in a huge number of additional pages. As a good example, if the Cardiff Bay branch was excluded from the Valley Lines table (130), the table would immediately shrink by 20 pages or so IIRC^▸ (if I recall/remember/read correctly)
 

Good to see that the publishers of the NRT^▸ (Network Rail Telecoms) have adopted my suggestion (although I doubt whether they were perusing 2 year old posts on this forum), and split Cardiff Bay onto a separate table.