Trains skipping stations when they are less than 5 minutes late

Craig1122 · 31 Jan 2024

norbitonflyer said:
It is unprofessional to not heed input from your customers. I have 27 years experience of using their services, and about 12,500 individual journeys, (and they have about £40,000 of my money).

Often replies on here seem to start from the point of view that rail staff can do no wrong. Unfortunately (in line with every job I've done outside the railway) there are always a number of people who don't care or are just incompetent. There are also the times when genuine mistakes are made as well as decisions which were the best guess at the time they were made but wrong with the benefit of hindsight.

I do think it's too easy in control to forget that there are people on the trains. So decisions like the ones you describe about terminating at Kingston are made which work on paper but not in practice when the next train is short formed or there isn't time for people to change.

As an aside I know someone who did as one poster suggested and got a job in control at SWT. They left because they couldn't stand it, their words were "they all think they're playing with a train set and forget about the passengers". This was some years ago so is in no way intended to disparage anyone doing the job now.

RailUK Forums

Bikeman78 · 1 Feb 2024

Ralph Ayres said:
Worse still is a driver being told to skip stops then being held at a signal in a platform the train was meant to be skipping. Happened to me once heading London-Horley and having resigned myself to doubling back via Gatwick then spent 5 minutes at Horley unable to get off.

I recall a Peterborough to King's Cross stopper that was 25 minutes late. The driver announced that it would run non stop. I thought it seemed excessive because the schedule was 90 minutes but a non stop run only takes 50 minutes. No surprise that it was already running early by Knebworth and was diverted into the platform at Welwyn Garden City to run as booked from there.

Idiotic said:
SWR have a T-3/15 or time to 3 policy whatever they call it. If a train is approaching 3-5mins late they will alter it to try and recover. Can happen quite often on the Windsor side sometimes with random stops being missed out.

Seems to be mainly suburban services which are altered

I had no idea it had got that bad. Most routes are only half hourly. I'd rather be 10 minutes late than 30 minutes late. In my experience, the schedules are pretty slack. Down trains often wait at Surbiton for a few minutes, for example. So there is scope to make up time without skipping stations.

Kite159 said:
Am I right in thinking that under SWT the Shepperton branch trains interworked with other services at Waterloo rather than self contained (other than at peak times)?

The Shepperton line has been fairly self contained for as long as I can remember. Most other routes on the slow lines through Wimbledon interwork so it seems slightly bizarre, given the long standing performance problem on the route.

Kite159 · 1 Feb 2024

Bikeman78 said:
I had no idea it had got that bad. Most routes are only half hourly. I'd rather be 10 minutes late than 30 minutes late. In my experience, the schedules are pretty slack. Down trains often wait at Surbiton for a few minutes, for example. So there is scope to make up time without skipping stations.

Especially for something like a Woking - Waterloo stopper, which can easily get delayed departing Woking if long distance trains are running late. Similar to the Basingstoke - Waterloo stopper which has to cross both fast lines from Basingstoke.

quartile · 2 Feb 2024

Craig1122 said:
Often replies on here seem to start from the point of view that rail staff can do no wrong. Unfortunately (in line with every job I've done outside the railway) there are always a number of people who don't care or are just incompetent. There are also the times when genuine mistakes are made as well as decisions which were the best guess at the time they were made but wrong with the benefit of hindsight.

I do think it's too easy in control to forget that there are people on the trains. So decisions like the ones you describe about terminating at Kingston are made which work on paper but not in practice when the next train is short formed or there isn't time for people to change.

As an aside I know someone who did as one poster suggested and got a job in control at SWT. They left because they couldn't stand it, their words were "they all think they're playing with a train set and forget about the passengers". This was some years ago so is in no way intended to disparage anyone doing the job now.

Having read this discussion through, I think overall those on the ground are trying to make the best of what they are given. The decisions that leave them with making those choices have been already decided by other more senior people or the Government/DfT

e.g.
i. How many spare drivers and where they are located is a management decision. - probably influenced by DfT requirements. There could at additional cost be more spare drivers available.
ii. Performance targets are not set by SWR but DfT. TfL have a different set of performance targets where the number of customers and much the disruption lengthens their journey forms part of the performance metric. The aim is to drive different behaviour than that discussed here.

Horizon22 · 2 Feb 2024

norbitonflyer said:
I'm sorry, there are too many instances of empty trains being run past overcrowded platforms simply to get them back on schedule for that to be credible.

As I said before, Norbiton alone is busier than the six stations on the Shepperton branch put together, and Kingston is twice as busy as that. But Control's decisions make it clear they consider all the intermediate stations to be optional and getting to Shepperton as an end in itself (even at times when a faster service from Waterloo to Shepperton is available, so there is no reason for anyone other than the driver and the guard to be going all the way, non-stop via Kingston)

I am aware that Control do a difficult job, and I'm not claiming that I could do better. But any complaints or suggestions to SWR and its predecessors always result in a rebuff - never an apology, or an acceptance that with hindsight they could have done better, and take it as a learning point. Control is God, and to challenge them is blasphemy.

There's a lot to consider in terms of the wider level of disruption, for example getting a problem train out of the way to prevent other trains also being caught up in it. For instance if a train on a 4tph service is 15 minutes late, you might as well amend it because the next service will be right on top of it. Crowding levels should be taken into account (e.g. try to amend only in the counter-peak direction) but that isn't always feasible or beneficial for the overall network. Certain stations do probably get disrupted more than others based on whether they are on the rail geography and what is available. You've got all the various crew, stock, time, infrastructure, resource and capacity constraints to handle.

There wouldn't be an apology from that level anyway, but regularly incident reviews are done which looks at how the disruption was handled, whether decisions were made correctly, were the communications good etc. It is easy to look at things in hindsight of course when you don't have multiple phone calls queuing, multiple conversations happening in the room etc. Sometimes controllers are dealt a bad hand with what is available

As for your last point I agree wholeheartedly with another post:

Bow Fell said:
It’s quite an emotive topic, and one that has cropped up before.

Any Controller that says that make the correct decisions 100% of the time is a liar.

I’ve gone home from shifts feeling rubbish after a bad day of service disruption and thought I’d wish I’d done better.

It's not that "Control is God" but more than controllers have a lot of different circumstances to consider, many of which are hidden to even those with lots of railway experience which is why decisions are taken which might seem odd at first, but have a reasoning that might be three-fold.

And yes, sometimes, mistakes are made. Controllers are only human and whilst some do see the job as moving train sets, not passengers, I would suggest they are the minority.

Meglos · 3 Feb 2024

norbitonflyer said:
Well, it may have gone beyond Surbiton, but it certainly went to Surbiton and stopped there for a while (as I could see on RTT whilst I was stuck at New Malden) so passengers could have been detrained there out of the way of everything else on the slow line. What it did after that I know not.

You can't rely on RTT to be accurate during distrupted services, it's highly unlikely the train would have remained at Surbiton for more than a couple of minutes due to the number of cross-platform connections between the Slow (platform 4), and Fast (platform 3) connections which are timetabled to happen.

RTT is an excellent tool, but it frequently fails when a service goes off the planned route or has changes to it's service, you need to use a service like Traxsy which actually shows which signalling block the train is located in.

For example this afternoon I was travelling from Chessington North to Waterloo (2M36), but earlier in the day there had been disruption due to a line trespass at Earlsfield. This from my point of view was exacerbated by the Chessington Branch running an hourly service rather than the normal 30 minute service. I got on the train at Chessington North in the front carriage, and the guard was out on the platform talking to the driver, which is a pretty unusual to see.

It was obvious from the conversation that something was up. The guard told the driver he would make an announcement upon leaving Tolworth (the next stop). So we departed Tolworth and the guard announced over the PA that the train would run non-stop from Malden Manor to Waterloo.

I can understand that it may have been nescessary to run fast, but I don't understand why Control chose Malden Manor, as the next service would have been an hour behind, and there is only one (single deck) bus route serving the station. We duly ran direct to Waterloo, but I really don't understand why the service didn't stop to set-down at Motspur Park or Raynes Park where there are other stopping Waterloo service connections available.

Back to RTT - as we passed through Wimbledon I checked them, and they showed the service as cancelled, despite the fact that a) It had operated Chessington South to Malden Manor, and b) I and other passengers were travelling on a train which was clearly running. Using Traxsy I was able to follow the service into Waterloo.

I would suggest thst this is far worse than terminating a via Kingston train at New Malden.

Bikeman78 · 3 Feb 2024

Meglos said:
It was obvious from the conversation that something was up. The guard told the driver he would make an announcement upon leaving Tolworth (the next stop). So we departed Tolworth and the guard announced over the PA that the train would run non-stop from Malden Manor to Waterloo.

I can understand that it may have been nescessary to run fast, but I don't understand why Control chose Malden Manor, as the next service would have been an hour behind, and there is only one (single deck) bus route serving the station. We duly ran direct to Waterloo, but I really don't understand why the service didn't stop to set-down at Motspur Park or Raynes Park where there are other stopping Waterloo service connections available.

What a bizarre decision. Why not run non stop from Raynes Park? It's only 20 or 30 mph through the platform anyway, so stopping for a few seconds would not make much difference. How late was it?

davethebus002@ · 3 Feb 2024

Meglos said:
You can't rely on RTT to be accurate during distrupted services, it's highly unlikely the train would have remained at Surbiton for more than a couple of minutes due to the number of cross-platform connections between the Slow (platform 4), and Fast (platform 3) connections which are timetabled to happen.

RTT is an excellent tool, but it frequently fails when a service goes off the planned route or has changes to it's service, you need to use a service like Traxsy which actually shows which signalling block the train is located in.

For example this afternoon I was travelling from Chessington North to Waterloo (2M36), but earlier in the day there had been disruption due to a line trespass at Earlsfield. This from my point of view was exacerbated by the Chessington Branch running an hourly service rather than the normal 30 minute service. I got on the train at Chessington North in the front carriage, and the guard was out on the platform talking to the driver, which is a pretty unusual to see.

It was obvious from the conversation that something was up. The guard told the driver he would make an announcement upon leaving Tolworth (the next stop). So we departed Tolworth and the guard announced over the PA that the train would run non-stop from Malden Manor to Waterloo.

I can understand that it may have been nescessary to run fast, but I don't understand why Control chose Malden Manor, as the next service would have been an hour behind, and there is only one (single deck) bus route serving the station. We duly ran direct to Waterloo, but I really don't understand why the service didn't stop to set-down at Motspur Park or Raynes Park where there are other stopping Waterloo service connections available.

Back to RTT - as we passed through Wimbledon I checked them, and they showed the service as cancelled, despite the fact that a) It had operated Chessington South to Malden Manor, and b) I and other passengers were travelling on a train which was clearly running. Using Traxsy I was able to follow the service into Waterloo.

I would suggest thst this is far worse than terminating a via Kingston train at New Malden.

Looking at real time trains I think you were actually on 2M32 running 59 mins late and 2M36 was cancelled throughout

Meglos · 3 Feb 2024

Bikeman78 said:
What a bizarre decision. Why not run non stop from Raynes Park? It's only 20 or 30 mph through the platform anyway, so stopping for a few seconds would not make much difference. How late was it?

We left Chessington North a whole 2 minutes late. Probably 5 minutes by the time some travellers had de-trained at Malden Manor.

thelongestroad · 3 Feb 2024

I remember working a train that had all stops taken out due to late running and we ended up passing what would have been the penultimate station early. I was cringing as we passed the station very slowly waiting for the signal come off as the passengers stood on the platform. That was pre that platform having PIS so most of the passengers would have been none the wiser.

E16 Cyclist · 3 Feb 2024

It’s been interesting reading this thread as i was the Windsor Line controller on Monday morning and rather than get upset about being called incompetent thought it might be helpful to provide some context

Around 7am Monday a suburban train failed on the down slow platform at Vauxhall and initially we were able to work around it but as we got further into the peak i was requested by Network Rail to divert Shepperton services onto the Windsor side.

By the time the failed train had moved and i was able to run services normally again it was around 9am and getting services back onto the suburban side meant that some trains were 20-25 minutes late. We were approaching the time crew were due to go on their break and with asos there was a risk of drivers who were late for their break refusing to work afterwards. I also had to protect as much as possible the passenger flow which was going into London which meant have two very late running down services. I agreed with the NR train running controller to run the first one fast from Waterloo to Teddington which recovered enough of its lost time not to lose its path or adversely affect up suburban services at New Malden. The second one i didn’t want to do the same as that would meant some customers having 90 minutes between trains so agreed with the train running comtroller to split the mitigation with half on the down service and half on the up therefore running fast Waterloo to Norbiton and fast Teddington to Wimbledon. And this was communicated to the crew at the same time.

As has previously been mentioned in this thread is how volatile the path is for the Shepperton services and the instructions from above are to make an intervention if expected to be 5 minutes late otherwise there’s the risk of losing its path. The last time i checked the Shepperton service at Fulwell on the down it was still projected to have a 5 minute late start.

I then had a guard at Ashford report they’d been assaulted (it later turned out they hadn’t been) which meant that the up line was temporarily blocked and I had ensure all relevant parties were notified including the NR incident controller and on call managers which obviously takes a little time.

People sometimes don’t realise how many staff there are in control, on the Windsor lines for example there is one NR train running controller whose job it is to play trains, one train service manager who manages the service and is very aware they are moving passengers rather than just trains and one information controller to communicate what’s happening

In fact the first i knew the up Shepperton had made up more time than expected was when i saw this thread on the way home. Incidentally the reason the rounder was cancelled was because the booked driver had been on the one that broke down at Vauxhall

Whilst i appreciate from looking at real train times it might look like incompetence there is a bigger picture whether it’s asos or the risk of losing the path or another incident happening on the network that requires your attention or even crew breaks and protecting other services. So in this instance with the information i had available a 30 minute gap between Teddington and Wimbledon was the least worst option. Obviously it’s frustrating to later find out that it wasn’t necessary

Unfortunately i wasn’t working today so can’t help explain what happened at Maldon Manor

MotCO · 3 Feb 2024

E16 Cyclist said:
It’s been interesting reading this thread as i was the Windsor Line controller on Monday morning and rather than get upset about being called incompetent thought it might be helpful to provide some context

Around 7am Monday a suburban train failed on the down slow platform at Vauxhall and initially we were able to work around it but as we got further into the peak i was requested by Network Rail to divert Shepperton services onto the Windsor side.

By the time the failed train had moved and i was able to run services normally again it was around 9am and getting services back onto the suburban side meant that some trains were 20-25 minutes late. We were approaching the time crew were due to go on their break and with asos there was a risk of drivers who were late for their break refusing to work afterwards. I also had to protect as much as possible the passenger flow which was going into London which meant have two very late running down services. I agreed with the NR train running controller to run the first one fast from Waterloo to Teddington which recovered enough of its lost time not to lose its path or adversely affect up suburban services at New Malden. The second one i didn’t want to do the same as that would meant some customers having 90 minutes between trains so agreed with the train running comtroller to split the mitigation with half on the down service and half on the up therefore running fast Waterloo to Norbiton and fast Teddington to Wimbledon. And this was communicated to the crew at the same time.

As has previously been mentioned in this thread is how volatile the path is for the Shepperton services and the instructions from above are to make an intervention if expected to be 5 minutes late otherwise there’s the risk of losing its path. The last time i checked the Shepperton service at Fulwell on the down it was still projected to have a 5 minute late start.

I then had a guard at Ashford report they’d been assaulted (it later turned out they hadn’t been) which meant that the up line was temporarily blocked and I had ensure all relevant parties were notified including the NR incident controller and on call managers which obviously takes a little time.

People sometimes don’t realise how many staff there are in control, on the Windsor lines for example there is one NR train running controller whose job it is to play trains, one train service manager who manages the service and is very aware they are moving passengers rather than just trains and one information controller to communicate what’s happening

In fact the first i knew the up Shepperton had made up more time than expected was when i saw this thread on the way home. Incidentally the reason the rounder was cancelled was because the booked driver had been on the one that broke down at Vauxhall

Whilst i appreciate from looking at real train times it might look like incompetence there is a bigger picture whether it’s asos or the risk of losing the path or another incident happening on the network that requires your attention

Unfortunately i wasn’t working today so can’t help explain what happened at Maldon Manor

Thank you for taking the time to provide such a full explanation.

(And for general discussion) I think the disappointing thing is that, if a driver realises that he is back on schedule, he has no means of varying the stop order. Why is this seen to be a risk?

Horizon22 · 3 Feb 2024

MotCO said:
Thank you for taking the time to provide such a full explanation.

(And for general discussion) I think the disappointing thing is that, if a driver realises that he is back on schedule, he has no means of varying the stop order. Why is this seen to be a risk?

Because you are giving contradictory instructions (probably at very short notice) which could cause a risk of an operational incident - such as stop short, fail to call - due to potential confusion about which instruction is the most relevant.

Craig1122 · 3 Feb 2024

E16 Cyclist said:
People sometimes don’t realise how many staff there are in control, on the Windsor lines for example there is one NR train running controller whose job it is to play trains, one train service manager who manages the service and is very aware they are moving passengers rather than just trains and one information controller to communicate what’s happening

Another side of this coin which I think people don't realise is how much this can slow down communication/ability to make decisions. The person you need to speak to is on the phone, then by the time they're free someone else is speaking to you, or ideally you'd tell 2 people at once but because of this you have to waste time repeating yourself.

One thing that comes across by comparison with London Underground through is how elongated the chain of command is for TOC/NR control by comparison. In a similar situation to the train leaving Shepperton earlier than expected it would be possible to alter back to booked working on the fly. You could probably measure the time taken in seconds rather than minutes.

norbitonflyer · 3 Feb 2024

E16 Cyclist said:
It’s been interesting reading this thread as i was the Windsor Line controller on Monday morning and rather than get upset about being called incompetent thought it might be helpful to provide some context

Around 7am Monday a suburban train failed on the down slow platform at Vauxhall and initially we were able to work around it but as we got further into the peak i was requested by Network Rail to divert Shepperton services onto the Windsor side.

I agreed with the NR train running controller to run the first one fast from Waterloo to Teddington which recovered enough of its lost time not to lose its path or adversely affect up suburban services at New Malden. The second one i didn’t want to do the same as that would meant some customers having 90 minutes between trains so agreed with the train running comtroller to split the mitigation with half on the down service and half on the up therefore running fast Waterloo to Norbiton and fast Teddington to Wimbledon.

As has previously been mentioned in this thread is how volatile the path is for the Shepperton services and the instructions from above are to make an intervention if expected to be 5 minutes late otherwise there’s the risk of losing its path. The last time i checked the Shepperton service at Fulwell on the down it was still projected to have a 5 minute late start.

Interesting insight, although I still would suggest that running one of them all statoins to Fulwell, and then take up its return path there would normally inconvenience fewer people than running fast through the busy stations between New Malden and Teddington.

Running fast Waterloo to Norbiton and another fast Teddington to Wimbledon.

Not really helpful if your journey is, eg Wimbledon to Norbiton or vice versa.

Meglos said:
I don't understand why Control chose Malden Manor,

It seems to be a common theme, to make the last stop before running fast one station before anywhere where there is anything useful to change to. Norbiton is another favourite.
Compounded when the train is then not diverted to the fast lines so has to travel no faster than thge stopper it will eventually be stuck behind. Perhaps a train that has had stops ommitted shopuld have a special headcode (or just change the initial "2" to a "1") to remind the signalling staff that the train is being "hurried-up" - no point in skipping the stops if it's not going to get there any faster.

Craig1122 · 3 Feb 2024

norbitonflyer said:
Compounded when the train is then not diverted to the fast lines so has to travel no faster than thge stopper it will eventually be stuck behind.

I've had this happen when a train ran fast from Twickenham to Waterloo. A good proportion of passengers will always be changing at Richmond so lots of people inconvenienced. Then a stopper was routed in front at St Margaret's and the fast lines were closed from Barnes for an engineering inspection of some kind. So no benefit to anyone was achieved. I think sometimes this kind of situation is a product of the best decision being made with the information available but unfortunately reality doesn't match!

Horizon22 · 3 Feb 2024

Craig1122 said:
I've had this happen when a train ran fast from Twickenham to Waterloo. A good proportion of passengers will always be changing at Richmond so lots of people inconvenienced. Then a stopper was routed in front at St Margaret's and the fast lines were closed from Barnes for an engineering inspection of some kind. So no benefit to anyone was achieved. I think sometimes this kind of situation is a product of the best decision being made with the information available but unfortunately reality doesn't match!

Yes in a control environment, the information often changes rapidly so you have to deal with things as you know it at the time. As some have said, with the luxury of hindsight you might do things completely differently and also nobody has a crystal ball as to how exactly a situation will unfold which might cause certain conflicts on the line.

Killingworth · 3 Feb 2024

There are clearly good reasons for trains to skip stops but the poor passengers who see their train sail through 4 minutes early despite showing on the CIS as stopping may not be aware of what they are.

This morning TPE's 1B66 0614 Liverpool Lime Street to Cleethorpes did just that at Dore & Totley leaving a dozen wondering why. No explanation was given at the time as to why it wasn't stopping at 8.04 or advice on what to do next. The following EMR service into Sheffield was cancelled due to strike action leaving the next train to Sheffield Northern's 8.57.

Some were wanting to connect with a train to York and did so eventually after catching a bus into Sheffield. Those heading for Doncaster to catch an ECML service to Kings Cross were particularly annoyed having planned that route to avoid strike bound EMR and the MML. How they subsequently fared is unknown.

A later response on Twitter said it was due to police dealing with an incident on the train.

The irony is that Dore & Totley featured on BBC News this morning; https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-68183222

The station is enjoying a very high public profile locally and new users are already being attracted before the new platform is opened.

New bridge installed at Dore & Totley as part of £137m rail upgrade

Published
12 hours ago

Share

IMAGE SOURCE,NETWORK RAIL
Image caption,
Lifts have been installed at either end of the 49ft (15m) long bridge
By Oliver Wright
BBC News

A new footbridge has been installed at Dore & Totley station as part of a multimillion-pound railway upgrade.
The 49ft (15m) long structure will link the existing platform to a second platform, which is currently being restored.
Lifts have also been installed at either end to provide disabled access to and from the new platform.
The work is part of a £137m upgrade of the Hope Valley Railway, which runs between Sheffield and Manchester.
A spokesperson for Network Rail said accessibility had been "at the forefront of the work", with contractors meeting with local disability groups during construction.
Graeme Whitehead, senior sponsor for the Hope Valley Railway Upgrade, said: "The completion of these works is a key milestone for the programme, as we edge closer to full completion of the Hope Valley Railway Upgrade.
"Our plans for Dore & Totley Station were centred around accessibility and after careful consultation with a number of groups, the delivery of these upgrades means the area will have a modern station that suits all needs."
Upgrade work at the station, including the installation of new track to allow longer trains with more carriages to stop, is expected to be finished in March.
Other work along the line includes creating a railway loop between Bamford and Hathersage, a new footbridge at Hathersage West and improvements to signalling.

Bow Fell · 4 Feb 2024

Killingworth said:
There are clearly good reasons for trains to skip stops but the poor passengers who see their train sail through 4 minutes early despite showing on the CIS as stopping may not be aware of what they are.

This morning TPE's 1B66 0614 Liverpool Lime Street to Cleethorpes did just that at Dore & Totley leaving a dozen wondering why. No explanation was given at the time as to why it wasn't stopping at 8.04 or advice on what to do next. The following EMR service into Sheffield was cancelled due to strike action leaving the next train to Sheffield Northern's 8.57.

If you are using RTT, then this isn’t a reliable source for showing missing stops such as that.

It was shown as cancelled, with a reason on CIS, so it should have displayed eventually and announced the reason.

What I will say is that unfortunately it wasn’t “Tyrell’d” until 0803 so a minute before, and after the train sailed through which isn’t good. But again it depends when the info was fed through to the information controller.

Killingworth · 4 Feb 2024

Bow Fell said:
If you are using RTT, then this isn’t a reliable source for showing missing stops such as that.

It was shown as cancelled, with a reason on CIS, so it should have displayed eventually and announced the reason.

What I will say is that unfortunately it wasn’t “Tyrell’d” until 0803 so a minute before, and after the train sailed through which isn’t good. But again it depends when the info was fed through to the information controller.

Tyrell"d?

I wasn't there but those who were and got to Doncaster were told iit had been cancelled, despite having seen iit running apparently in service with their own eyes.

Some could have caught the 7.57 into Sheffield if they'd known this one wasn't stopping. The station is a construction site at present so it is hard to hear announcements or see the old small screen.

Falcon1200 · 4 Feb 2024

E16 Cyclist said:
Whilst i appreciate from looking at real train times it might look like incompetence there is a bigger picture whether it’s asos or the risk of losing the path or another incident happening on the network that requires your attention or even crew breaks and protecting other services.

An excellent post which illustrates the multiple decisions which Controllers make during their shift, sometimes on the basis of incomplete or unclear information and with no crystal ball to tell them how long an incident will last, or even just how long a given train will take to turn round; This could vary wildly!

pompeyfan · 4 Feb 2024

Talking of questionable decisions, and I know it’s come up before but it needs highlighting. Who makes the regulating decisions at Honiton?

I was keeping an eye on open train times and noticed a down service to Exeter was about 11 minutes late departing Yeovil, the train then made it back to about 7 minutes late however the train was still held at Honiton to allow a Waterloo service through. This then caused said Exeter train to be 40 minutes late, which then delayed the Axminster shuttle at Pinhoe. The next Exeter service was then held to allow both the Axminster shuttle and the Waterloo service through.

This means there was 2 Exeter bound trains delayed by 40 minutes and the Axminster service was about 15-20 minutes late, all for the sake of 7 minutes.

MotCO · 4 Feb 2024

Horizon22 said:
Because you are giving contradictory instructions (probably at very short notice) which could cause a risk of an operational incident - such as stop short, fail to call - due to potential confusion about which instruction is the most relevant.

The driver would not be confused - I'm suggesting that he/she has the discretion to stop at a station if he/she is now back on schedule.

The confusion to passengerwould be minimal - for those on the train the driver can make announcements; passengers on platforms could catch the train easily in the Shepperton /Waterloo example being quoted because it can only go to one destination and it says where it is going on the front.

Bikeman78 · 4 Feb 2024

Meglos said:
We left Chessington North a whole 2 minutes late. Probably 5 minutes by the time some travellers had de-trained at Malden Manor.

On closer inspection, it was 2M32 running an hour late.

MotCO said:
The driver would not be confused - I'm suggesting that he/she has the discretion to stop at a station if he/she is now back on schedule.

The confusion to passengerwould be minimal - for those on the train the driver can make announcements; passengers on platforms could catch the train easily in the Shepperton /Waterloo example being quoted because it can only go to one destination and it says where it is going on the front.

Decisions do get reversed. See my Welwyn example in post #122.

43066 · 4 Feb 2024

MotCO said:
The driver would not be confused - I'm suggesting that he/she has the discretion to stop at a station if he/she is now back on schedule.

It doesn’t really work like that. If you’re stopping out of course, it needs to be for a good reason, or it’ll be treated as a safety of the line incident.

DMUfan · 4 Feb 2024

Bikeman78 said:
I recall a Peterborough to King's Cross stopper that was 25 minutes late. The driver announced that it would run non stop. I thought it seemed excessive because the schedule was 90 minutes but a non stop run only takes 50 minutes. No surprise that it was already running early by Knebworth and was diverted into the platform at Welwyn Garden City to run as booked from there.

I had no idea it had got that bad. Most routes are only half hourly. I'd rather be 10 minutes late than 30 minutes late. In my experience, the schedules are pretty slack. Down trains often wait at Surbiton for a few minutes, for example. So there is scope to make up time without skipping stations.

The Shepperton line has been fairly self contained for as long as I can remember. Most other routes on the slow lines through Wimbledon interwork so it seems slightly bizarre, given the long standing performance problem on the route.

MotCO · 4 Feb 2024

43066 said:
It doesn’t really work like that. If you’re stopping out of course, it needs to be for a good reason, or it’ll be treated as a safety of the line incident.

Ah! So a train stopping unexpectedly would constitute an obstacle on the line for trains behind it. That makes sense.

43066 · 4 Feb 2024

MotCO said:
Ah! So a train stopping unexpectedly would constitute an obstacle on the line for trains behind it. That makes sense.

Well, no. The signalling system prevents that, although of course it may cause delays!

Stopping out of course (ie where not diagrammed to) is treated as a safety of the line incident, though. So it isn’t something to be taken lightly.

Meglos · 4 Feb 2024

Bikeman78 said:
On closer inspection, it was 2M32 running an hour late.

That makes it much more sensible. however a stop at MOT or RAY would only have added a few minutes, and saved so many travellers from being inconvienienced

norbitonflyer · 4 Feb 2024

MotCO said:
Ah! So a train stopping unexpectedly would constitute an obstacle on the line for trains behind it. That makes sense.

In the olden days, without continuous track circuiting, it was possible for a train stopping in section to be overlooked by the signalman, who would release the interlocking (on the erroneous assumption it had failed to return to "line clear" after the previoous train had left the section) and let another train into the section. There were several incidents on the Southern in the 30s to 50s of such things happening.

Trains skipping stations when they are less than 5 minutes late

Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

On Moderation

Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

New bridge installed at Dore & Totley as part of £137m rail upgrade​

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

New bridge installed at Dore & Totley as part of £137m rail upgrade