You cannot accept you are wrong can you? Here are the facts:
Your opinion is wrong
It is definitive. It's in the ATOC^» (Association of Train Operating Companies See - here)/NR^» (Network Rail - home page) data feeds - go get them yourself and check, or check with one of the names/company I've provided.

I'm well aware of who you are and for whom you work. I don't care.
Personal attacks are banned on this forum, need I remind you of that, since you so quickly publicly remind me?

I am telling you definitively that is what a headcode is within timetabling. I'm afraid you are wrong in this instance. If you wish to find out more I'd suggest you talk to ATOC^» (Association of Train Operating Companies See - here)/Network Rail, perhaps Tom Cairns, Peter Higgs or, if you feel brave Rockshore.

An example of the RSID being used is retail with Virgin Trains. (Which probably means retail with thetrainline too - though I cannot back up that assertion).

Yes and no...

That may well be the case in the operating railway, but is not the case within timetabling.

I'm afraid in this instance you are incorrect. The headcode forms part of the RSID, made up from the ATOC^» (Association of Train Operating Companies See - here) operator code, so for the above example, it is GW1276.

Thanks for the info, certainly never knew that before.

There I am certainly wrong, I got myself in a pickle it seems. Original post modified suitably.

Richard I agree, however that isn't what this rule says. The rules primary purpose is to protect staff from staff.

I'm of the opinion that the rule is far more simple and correct if it says:

Well, this is old; but I felt the need to bring it up.

You say that identifying operational staff unless we are 100% positive is wrong, but it is happening. Frankly this whole policy is unenforceable, which makes it pointless.

There are posts on this website that offer a precise timeframe at a specific station that makes identifying staff trivial to the management, colleagues and other people.

---

Example time: I posted in this thread. The thread is on delays at Hayes, the original post is dated 28th February. I post:
In context that is freely available, we know this incident is on February 28th 2013, late evening. I missed the last connection. We know I was caught up in the Hayes fire that puts me at Paddington around midnight. There is only one person this Duty Station Manager could be. Originally I named this man, I was asked to remove it, but they've been identified without the name to management, colleagues and some other people, it's easy!

You say that the line is hard to draw, but the above (which easily) identifies this person, is, by your rule unacceptable. However it's about as discrete as I or anyone else can be while discussing something.

So what do you do?

Not really difficult in anyway. Spoke to the Duty Station Manager (nice guy), he directed me to the ticket office.

The ticket office took my tickets, asked to/from stations, if I'd allowed an hour to cross London (to which my response was no, I allowed the time listed on page 44 of the Commercial Information document). Some questions followed about my choice of trains, why I broke my journey at Reading and a few other attempts to get out of paying. Then a taxi was arranged, I was told to wait for that specific one with my name in the window - a short wait followed, and I got a taxi.

East Kent.

Indeed, the contracting company (I think Carilion) were busy taking it out and filling the holes with concrete when I passed through. I took this at 2245 last night.


I had quite a productive time actually, had a chat with Jim Holden, a bunch of (on-board) revenue staff who would be on the midnight shift telling people about the closed footbridge. Then there was a points failure and ^240 taxi, but that's in the past.

I got caught up in that, and the points failure at Reading West Junction. Myself and another passenger who missed our last connection were given taxis.

So I can't fault FGWs^▸ (First Great Western) customer service there.

Just me and my taxi and we managed to get a fair cost up (^243.60), thanks to FGW for paying.

There certainly was not at 12.20 today. Maybe peak only.

Corrected. Oopsies, I knew what I meant!

Categorically, from Network Rail & FGW^▸ (First Great Western).

The existing footbridge will close at 2359 tonight (28 Feb 2013). The 'subway' will be in use tomorrow.

As far as I'm concerned if you actively steal something, then you live with whatever the consequences of that theft is, an article asking for NR^» (Network Rail - home page) blood because your son either is or associates with thieves gets no sympathy with me.

Sure Network Rail should have 80ft high dual electric fences with guard dogs and razor wire, man traps at every access point, CCTV^▸ (Closed Circuit Tele Vision) everywhere rather than a fence no higher than my knee but people also just shouldn't trespass and then steal property.

I'm clearly in ideal world land aren't I.

As a serious point, the explosives should be suitably stored - that's not debatable.

Edit, son not soon!

According to GetReading, the footbridge is closed.

I think this is more a failure to publish the article on the correct day...

I was referring to this:
Which was referring to this:

Perhaps your sarcasm would be appropriate if, I don't know, you read my post because OXF^» (Oxford - next trains) -> PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) is not the same as PAD -> OXF.


Bignosemac, you are completely correct. I was more talking hypothetically given the current timetable, but that certainly isn't clear in anyway and I hadn't really considered other paths [other than they can be moved ]!