RealTimeTrains website

[IanXC]

I'd say it's more signaller intervention (whether that be automated by ARS or not is a different matter!) but essentially yes.

If the thing with the TOC comes off, then it'll be similar to Darwin in that respect. That should open some floodgates in that area, rather like ScotRail and train allocations...

Ah yes I was thinking of a areas where routes can be set such as NX panels that don't even have train describers, but you've defined it better.

Oh interesting look forward to seeing what you've got in the works! Of course they biggest problem in this area is where ACI and set swaps argue with each other.

 

[midlandred]

Sorry to butt in - it’s probably been asked and answered before - some passenger and freight movements, RTT shows loco/unit, but not all.
Is there an accessible site which shows more than RTT?
Thanks

 

[Intercity110]

Sorry to butt in - it’s probably been asked and answered before - some passenger and freight movements, RTT shows loco/unit, but not all.
Is there an accessible site which shows more than RTT?
Thanks

Railcam gives TOPS where it has them, and the specific freight companies, not just ‘ZZ’. (Tops allocations require a subscription, but this gets you signalling diagrams as well)

 

[XAM2175]

Sorry to butt in - it’s probably been asked and answered before - some passenger and freight movements, RTT shows loco/unit, but not all.
Is there an accessible site which shows more than RTT?
Thanks

This is a special arrangement between the operators concerned and RTT. The official data from Network Rail contains no allocation information at all.

 

[Merle Haggard]

Now I know pathing times don't reflect traction used BUT...
Today, there was a slightly odd Avanti 16.33 Birmingham International to Euston, worked by double Voyagers.
But it's shown on R.T.T. as 'pathed for 125 m.p.h. diesel loco', and I know that doesn't mean it should be a 125 m.p.h diesel loco.
But the only possible 125 m.p.h. diesel loco is a Cl 67, and I thought that running at 125 was heavily proscribed.
Are 67s cleared for 125 m.p.h. on this route - perhaps dating back to Wrexham & Shropshire?
As far as I can tell, other Voyager turns are shown as 125 dmu.

 

[The Planner]

Now I know pathing times don't reflect traction used BUT...
Today, there was a slightly odd Avanti 16.33 Birmingham International to Euston, worked by double Voyagers.
But it's shown on R.T.T. as 'pathed for 125 m.p.h. diesel loco', and I know that doesn't mean it should be a 125 m.p.h diesel loco.
But the only possible 125 m.p.h. diesel loco is a Cl 67, and I thought that running at 125 was heavily proscribed.
Are 67s cleared for 125 m.p.h. on this route - perhaps dating back to Wrexham & Shropshire?
As far as I can tell, other Voyager turns are shown as 125 dmu.

It will be timed as a Voyager.

 

[Merle Haggard]

It will be timed as a Voyager.

Right, thanks, I think I understand (my bold); but what's the significance of 'Pathed as'?

 

[The Planner]

Right, thanks, I think I understand (my bold); but what's the significance of 'Pathed as'?

Same thing, its the ever apparent way the data is transferred with timing loads.

 

[Bald Rick]

Now I know pathing times don't reflect traction used BUT...
Today, there was a slightly odd Avanti 16.33 Birmingham International to Euston, worked by double Voyagers.
But it's shown on R.T.T. as 'pathed for 125 m.p.h. diesel loco', and I know that doesn't mean it should be a 125 m.p.h diesel loco.
But the only possible 125 m.p.h. diesel loco is a Cl 67, and I thought that running at 125 was heavily proscribed.
Are 67s cleared for 125 m.p.h. on this route - perhaps dating back to Wrexham & Shropshire?
As far as I can tell, other Voyager turns are shown as 125 dmu.

Thats 1B52, normally a New St starter, and a double voyager, and always timed as ‘125 diesel loco.‘

amended to an International start until the timetable change, I believe.

 

[XAM2175]

Right, thanks, I think I understand (my bold); but what's the significance of 'Pathed as'?

Pathing and timing are the same thing in this circumstance; showing it as loco-hauled instead of an MU is just one of those oddities of the planning process. Sometimes it's simply down to there not being the correct class-specific pathing data available for the route.

Other times it's simply become convention. Off the top of my head, the Class 325 postal units are usually pathed as "Electric locomotive, trailing load 325 tonnes"

 

[pokemonsuper9]

the Class 325 postal units are usually pathed as "Electric locomotive, trailing load 325 tonnes"

Northern's 331s have the same thing

 

[Merle Haggard]

Thats 1B52, normally a New St starter, and a double voyager, and always timed as ‘125 diesel loco.‘

amended to an International start until the timetable change, I believe.

Thanks, just seems an odd train - it's 5 minutes behind the Preston - Euston via W Mids, and the New St starters usually leave International at about nn.58. I hadn't noticed it before, thought it was a one-off to get sets from Central Rivers to Euston in service.

Edited curse Apple auto correct!

 

[spark001uk]

Well this is going to be an interesting service to ride.!!

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:C97740/2023-04-08/detailed#allox_id=0

 

[D6130]

Well this is going to be an interesting service to ride.!!

Just as well the IET is in the middle and not at the front....otherwise the driver may forget the 387s and take it up to 125mph!

 

[Class15]

Well this is going to be an interesting service to ride.!!

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:C97740/2023-04-08/detailed#allox_id=0

Wow! Has anyone got pics?

 

[JonathanH]

Wow! Has anyone got pics?

It won't have actually happened, so I doubt anyone went out to take a picture.

 

[Class15]

It won't have actually happened, so I doubt anyone went out to take a picture.

Really?

 

[JonathanH]

Really?

Yes, all that has happened is that somewhere in the system someone has forgotten to remove 800002 from the working.

 

[Class15]

Yes, all that has happened is that somewhere in the system someone has forgotten to remove 800002 from the working.

Oh thanks.

 

[JonathanH]

Oh thanks.

If we look at RTT in a bit more detail, 800002 is shown arriving into platform 2 at Paddington off 1L76 1259 Cheltenham Spa to London Paddington

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:C97872/2023-04-08/detailed#allox_id=1

It then went to North Pole Depot as 5L76 at 1518, on a working not on RTT, with the pair of 387s working the service shown on RTT. (I guess that in the usual timetable it works the 1550 departure, but GWR are using 387s instead.)

It is possible to see this here (ignoring the fact that it has got mixed up with a Crossrail empty stock working), noting the departure from platform 2.

- - TrackIT!

 

[Tom]

The electric/diesel loco, timed at <insert unit> tonnes is somewhat annoying and we try and clean it up on our side with a filter by timing load and operator. Looks like there’s a couple more to do soon.

On another note, there will be a refresh of all the delay and cancellation codes in a coming release later this week.

 

[XCTurbostar]

The electric/diesel loco, timed at <insert unit> tonnes is somewhat annoying and we try and clean it up on our side with a filter by timing load and operator. Looks like there’s a couple more to do soon.

On another note, there will be a refresh of all the delay and cancellation codes in a coming release later this week.

Many thanks for your efforts. Is there any possibility of a line under each TSC with what it means? e.g. 54606070 - RfD Freightliner (Contracts)

 

[Tom]

I don’t think there’s a reliable frequently updated data source that provides that information so it would be a bit of a challenge to do so as I’d rather not add to the list of manual admin requirements.

 

[XCTurbostar]

I don’t think there’s a reliable frequently updated data source that provides that information so it would be a bit of a challenge to do so as I’d rather not add to the list of manual admin requirements.

Fair point, there is a redacted .xls which has most of them but its a moving target.

 

[Benjwri]

Is there any way RTT could expand on the info as to the next scheduled working of a unit? There is limited support, I believe through associations, but other sites are able to give next workings for pretty much every service, and this is the only function that I still can’t use RTT for.

 

[357]

Is there any way RTT could expand on the info as to the next scheduled working of a unit? There is limited support, I believe through associations, but other sites are able to give next workings for pretty much every service, and this is the only function that I still can’t use RTT for.

And for those people actually traveling as a regular passenger, it would also make it easier to see where the "inbound" stock is for their train.

 

[Tom]

The sites that have extended associations I suspect are either using something called inferred associations so aren't entirely guaranteed but are done through a couple of different systems. One of those is going to be Darwin so <insert reasons for being unable to use Darwin because the railway are precious, repeat ad infinitum>. The other I think is a system that we as a business have access to but I don't think we're actually permitted to use it in the public domain... but I will go away and ask a few questions.

There are a few quality of life improvements on the way for KYT, which may go some way to mitigating it for those TOCs.

 

[louis97]

On RTT we recently did an update to some of Train Describer reference data used to generate the reported times.

It would be really helpful if people could PM me any reports showing with "TRUST Smart" as the data source (hover over a reported time). Ideally a link to the train in question and what location would be great. I'm looking for examples where it is an odd report doing this, not a whole area missing (such as the whole Macclesfield area which we are aware of). Secondly any times that are wildly incorrect would be good too, we have a list of locations but I highly suspect there are more.

 

[Benjwri]

The sites that have extended associations I suspect are either using something called inferred associations so aren't entirely guaranteed but are done through a couple of different systems. One of those is going to be Darwin so <insert reasons for being unable to use Darwin because the railway are precious, repeat ad infinitum>. The other I think is a system that we as a business have access to but I don't think we're actually permitted to use it in the public domain... but I will go away and ask a few questions.

There are a few quality of life improvements on the way for KYT, which may go some way to mitigating it for those TOCs.

Thanks! I definitely know of one public source which doesn’t use Darwin and provides this, but to be fair it could be their own internal algorithm which just looks for the next/last arrival into the booked platform. Just helps at large stations where otherwise you have to scroll through and it’s easy to miss a service.

 

[MrJeeves]

On RTT we recently did an update to some of Train Describer reference data used to generate the reported times.

It would be really helpful if people could PM me any reports showing with "TRUST Smart" as the data source (hover over a reported time). Ideally a link to the train in question and what location would be great. I'm looking for examples where it is an odd report doing this, not a whole area missing (such as the whole Macclesfield area which we are aware of). Secondly any times that are wildly incorrect would be good too, we have a list of locations but I highly suspect there are more.

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:L45745/2023-04-19/detailed

Clapham Junction, Balham, Earlswood (Surrey), Purley all show as TRUST (Smart)