Long dwell times for 0755 Crewe to London Euston

[crehld]

I'm currently on the 07:55 from Crewe to Euston, enjoying a 10 minute timetabled wait at Rugby. So far we've enjoyed a 5 minute wait at Rugeley Trent Valley (timetabled for 9 minutes), and (going by station clocks) a 3 minute wait at Lichfield TV, where one would have sufficed.

Now I'm not too fussy and it doesn't bother me all that much. But it strikes me that without these long dwell times we'd be at Euston about 20 minutes earlier, making the overall journey over 10% quicker. And it seems to negate a lot of the hype London Midland made about having 110mph trains.

What's the reason for these lengthy dwell times on this train? Is it a pathing thing to constantly to let thing overtake us? Is the train simply quicker than what it's been planned for? Or is it to allow sufficient padding in the timetable to make up for potential delays (indeed we were delayed leaving Crewe)?

 

[ComUtoR]

Whilst I cannot provide the specific response for your post I would like to comment that if you cut 20 minutes out and make the journey shorter it just breaks the service more often.

I don't like the term "padding" and I would prefer that trains run to a realistic schedule to allow for passengers and pathways etc.

I would much prefer as a passenger to know what time my train is expected to arrive and have it arrive at that time than having a shorter journey time and my train being constantly late.

On my TOC we suffer with that exact problem. Passengers were told that journey times were quicker and everyone rejoiced. As the person who sits up the front all I see that was removed was dwell times and pathways got tighter. They didn't speed up the line or move the stations closer together. I find it more of a lie to tell passengers their journey will be X but in reality it takes Y.

 

[najaB]

What's the reason for these lengthy dwell times on this train? Is it a pathing thing to constantly to let thing overtake us? Is the train simply quicker than what it's been planned for?

Looking at Realtime Trains, in the time it is stopped at Rugeley Trent Valley two southbound VT services pass, so that does look like it could be pathing. Lichfield Trent Valley is only timetabled as a two minute stop.

 

[crehld]

Whilst I cannot provide the specific response for your post I would like to comment that if you cut 20 minutes out and make the journey shorter it just breaks the service more often.

I don't like the term "padding" and I would prefer that trains run to a realistic schedule to allow for passengers and pathways etc.

I would much prefer as a passenger to know what time my train is expected to arrive and have it arrive at that time than having a shorter journey time and my train being constantly late.

On my TOC we suffer with that exact problem. Passengers were told that journey times were quicker and everyone rejoiced. As the person who sits up the front all I see that was removed was dwell times and pathways got tighter. They didn't speed up the line or move the stations closer together. I find it more of a lie to tell passengers their journey will be X but in reality it takes Y.

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather be given a realistic expectation of arrival times too. It just seems that a 9 minute wait and a ten minute wait are a little excessive... If that's indeed the reason they exist.

 

[ComUtoR]

We used to have a service that had a 10 minute wait 1 stop from destination. I always hated it and never understood why it wasn't spread out along the line to provide a more relaxed timetable.

Now I understand more about pathways etc I can see why services are pushed through some junctions but held at others. Chuck in regulation and it gets more complicated.

I also prefer sitting at a station with an extended dwell time than getting slow sections and chugging along on yellows and still hitting your next stop late !

At least when you have a long station dwell passengers can get up and stretch their legs knowing that the train wont depart until booked. It's at least a swift half on the platform.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Don't get me wrong, I'd rather be given a realistic expectation of arrival times too. It just seems that a 9 minute wait and a ten minute wait are a little excessive... If that's indeed the reason they exist.

I vastly prefer waiting time spread along the route than at the end, as it means the interim timings are likely to be reliable, not just the end arrival.

 

[The Planner]

Not checked but I would suspect the Rugeley stop is to connect into a Chase line service?

 

[route:oxford]

We used to have a service that had a 10 minute wait 1 stop from destination. I always hated it and never understood why it wasn't spread out along the line to provide a more relaxed timetable.

A bit like the joyous 11 minute wait at Wolverhampton follow by 20 minute slow run into Grand Central when, subject to pathing, the Glasgow-Birmingham journey could drop as low hours 3h50m with a 2 minute stop at Wolverhampton and a 16 minute run into Birmingham.

Or the hell that is sitting looking at derelict garages in Edinburgh...

 

[87015]

Not checked but I would suspect the Rugeley stop is to connect into a Chase line service?

Behave, this is LM being talked about. It's a minus five into the Birmingham, then leaves five before the next one arrives from Walsall...

 

[louis97]

The information currently available for the May timetable on Opentraintimes does actually show this service getting into London 21 minutes early than now - Minus the wait at Rugeley and Rugby. 1029 vice 1050.

 

[83G/84D]

Some of the Penzance bound cross country services in the evening follow a GWR service (also Penzance bound) from Exeter right through to Penzance, and have an extended dwell time at Plymouth.

Long signal sections right through Cornwall probably have something to do with it. This will change in around 3 years time if the planned proposals as they stand at the moment come to fruition.

 

[The Planner]

Behave, this is LM being talked about. It's a minus five into the Birmingham, then leaves five before the next one arrives from Walsall...

Ha! Excellent, so they are. In which case it is a bizarre way of holding the train back as overtaking plays no part of it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A bit like the joyous 11 minute wait at Wolverhampton follow by 20 minute slow run into Grand Central when, subject to pathing, the Glasgow-Birmingham journey could drop as low hours 3h50m with a 2 minute stop at Wolverhampton and a 16 minute run into Birmingham.

Easier to hide a train at Wolves than it is New St, simple as.