Service recovery (or lack of) on GTR Great Northern

[jon0844]

Isn't there an intention to terminate more trains at Letchworth in the big timetable recast? There will be even fewer trains going to Cambridge than now.

Trains can be shut down quickly until you encounter someone refusing to leave the toilet or is asleep and with lots of luggage. If they're not under the influence it might not be too tricky but what about when they are and they're possibly homeless and just say they're not getting off?

The platform staff and driver can only do so much and it takes additional time and even more so when the police need to be called who will manhandle the person(s) off. Such incidents aren't as rare as many people might think and they only go unnoticed in locations where it wouldn't grind running services to a halt. Letchworth is an elevated risk for delays and impacting other services.

 

[MikeWM]

An error by the sounds of it is terminating in a platform then needing to shunt clear, it seems, without sufficient time to do so. It sounds like this train (1L48) needs to run forward to Royston and terminate in the Up Platform if possible or onwards to Cambridge or it needs to wait on the Hitchin Flyover and follow 1T50 into Letchworth. Who knows whether any of these options are viable.

I suspect nothing will change until the December recast - though hopefully they can improve the turnaround time at Letchworth - and those of us who have to get this train a few times a week will continue to be inconvenienced almost every time.

Though even without 1L48 in the way, tonight 1T50 managed to sit at Cambridge for 10 minutes for whatever reason, so once again was late getting to Ely - and once again put on platform 2 to avoid clashing with the Ipswich-Peterborough service. This must be one of the most re-platformed trains in the country - it ends up on platform 2 more than 50% of the time in my experience. (Which is an added irritant to the inevitable delay when catching this service, as first it gets further delayed taking the slow-ish crossover to get to platform 2, and then it is considerably further to get out of the station than arriving on platform 1).

 

[bramling]

An error by the sounds of it is terminating in a platform then needing to shunt clear, it seems, without sufficient time to do so. It sounds like this train (1L48) needs to run forward to Royston and terminate in the Up Platform if possible or onwards to Cambridge or it needs to wait on the Hitchin Flyover and follow 1T50 into Letchworth. Who knows whether any of these options are viable.

Royston would likely be worse, as it can block the down line waiting for the up platform to become free - and you still have the emptying out problem.

Emptying out at Letchworth is the best option, they just need to make it work.

 

[MikeWM]

Isn't there an intention to terminate more trains at Letchworth in the big timetable recast? There will be even fewer trains going to Cambridge than now.

Quickly looking again at the draft timetable, seems to be the same number of terminators as now (at 1721, 1751 and 1821).

The issue I see with the recast is wholly inadequate times allowed between the stopper, semi-fast and fast in the down direction. For example, the 1718 off Kings Cross to Kings Lynn is due to arrive at Cambridge at 1813, with the preceding Thameslink semi-fast due to arrive just before at 1809 and the preceding stopper due to arrive at Cambridge just before that at 1805 - and that stopper is due to leave Letchworth just 8 minutes after the terminating service at 1721...

It's not hard to see that this will be another train that will be late on a regular basis, as the slightest delay to the Letchworth terminator, or the slightest delay in getting it moved off, or the slightest delay to the stopper, or the slightest delay to the Thameslink from Brighton, will delay the 1718 getting to Cambridge.

It looks pretty awful actually.

Letchworth is an elevated risk for delays and impacting other services.

Agreed. Maybe GN should have thought of that before putting in a service that requires a very-quick turnaround time there, which will delay one of its busiest long-distance commuter services if the slightest thing goes wrong.

 

[philjo]

Holding the service on the flyover would not work unless it is running very late as the Brighton-Cambridge service isn’t far behind - it is usually leaving Stevenage as the Kings Lynn train passes it. The Kings Lynn train would also then be potentially delayed depending what southbound services are passing through Hitchin before crossing over Cambridge junction. Pre-Covid the terminating service ran to Baldock. Assuming the up Kings Lynn - Kings cross service is on time there should then be a longer period to terminate at Baldock though the driver also then has to change ends.

 

[Robski]

Pre-Covid the terminating service ran to Baldock. Assuming the up Kings Lynn - Kings cross service is on time there should then be a longer period to terminate at Baldock though the driver also then has to change ends.

Baldock is unstaffed in the evening peak, so it would be the driver alone de-training at Baldock.

 

[uglymonkey]

I've been on the old Baldock terminator, running across the crossover onto the up platform and then waits there what seems to be a considerable time for the driver to change ends and the signal pulled off to depart. All the time it is sitting there (10 minutes?) It's blocking the line.

 

[bramling]

Baldock is unstaffed in the evening peak, so it would be the driver alone de-training at Baldock.

They used to have staff assisting when the 365s terminated there.

Whatever option is chosen is going to be a problem if it’s taking 7 minutes to empty out an 8-car train. This problem is what GTR need to sort. It shouldn’t be that hard, so the fact that it continues to take 7 minutes suggests GTR don’t care sufficiently. Which perhaps is why their timekeeping is poor across the board and compares disfavourably to FCC days.

 

[sharpener]

Holding the service on the flyover would not work unless it is running very late as the Brighton-Cambridge service isn’t far behind - it is usually leaving Stevenage as the Kings Lynn train passes it. The Kings Lynn train would also then be potentially delayed depending what southbound services are passing through Hitchin before crossing over Cambridge junction. Pre-Covid the terminating service ran to Baldock. Assuming the up Kings Lynn - Kings cross service is on time there should then be a longer period to terminate at Baldock though the driver also then has to change ends.

Maybe they could hold it in the platform at Hitchin? There is a convenient 11 min gap between the Harrogate and Leeds services which would be enough for 1T50 to loop round it on the fast before taking the flyover. Assuming the ladder has the necessary crossover, I can't remember if it does.

 

[jon0844]

Maybe they could hold it in the platform at Hitchin? There is a convenient 11 min gap between the Harrogate and Leeds services which would be enough for 1T50 to loop round it on the fast before taking the flyover. Assuming the ladder has the necessary crossover, I can't remember if it does.

Trains would need to go onto the down fast after Stevenage to pass Hitchin and then back on to the slow for the flyover.

 

[sharpener]

Trains would need to go onto the down fast after Stevenage to pass Hitchin and then back on to the slow for the flyover.

Ah. I thought there was a slow to fast crossover approaching Hitchin, should have looked in my Quail book before posting. It just shows a fast to slow one at 31m 20ch.

Still might be do-able in any case, Stevenage to Hitchin doesn't take long.

 

[jon0844]

Ah. I thought there was a slow to fast crossover approaching Hitchin, should have looked in my Quail book before posting. Still might be do-able?

While you may have more time to terminate at Hitchin, it still has to go ECS to Letchworth as there's no practical way that I can see to get it to get over to P1 to start back to London.

While you gain in not having the line blocked as you terminate a train at LET, you also get a lot of people moaning that the train no longer goes to Letchworth. As such, I don't think the idea will work.

 

[WeGoAgain]

Maybe they could hold it in the platform at Hitchin? There is a convenient 11 min gap between the Harrogate and Leeds services which would be enough for 1T50 to loop round it on the fast before taking the flyover. Assuming the ladder has the necessary crossover, I can't remember if it does.

While you may have more time to terminate at Hitchin, it still has to go ECS to Letchworth as there's no practical way that I can see to get it to get over to P1 to start back to London.

While you gain in not having the line blocked as you terminate a train at LET, you also get a lot of people moaning that the train no longer goes to Letchworth. As such, I don't think the idea will work.

Hold, not terminate.

 

[jon0844]

Hold, not terminate.

But then you have people wanting to get to Letchworth wondering why they're being held at Hitchin when there's nothing ahead. The issue with terminating the train isn't really their problem.

Ideally, run all the trains to Cambridge - which, for one thing, gives people a better service and less of a wait if a 2Cxx is cancelled. 30 minute wait instead of 60 at many stations.

 

[bramling]

While you may have more time to terminate at Hitchin, it still has to go ECS to Letchworth as there's no practical way that I can see to get it to get over to P1 to start back to London.

While you gain in not having the line blocked as you terminate a train at LET, you also get a lot of people moaning that the train no longer goes to Letchworth. As such, I don't think the idea will work.

The evening services don’t seem to be that well used to Letchworth, so you could get away with terminating at Hitchin.

But I think it’s just moving the problem. In the evening peak the down platform at Hitchin has 4tph TL, 2tph Peterborough, 2tph Cambridge and the 2tph Letchworth. Risky to terminate trains on a platform which has that level of service. In essence it’s just moving the problem from one place to another.

The real issue is they just need to get the trains closed up quicker. More staff at Letchworth for starters. GTR aren’t exactly short on station staff, though I’ve always found there deployment quite odd - it seems to be feast or famine, at some times there seem to be hundreds of staff milling around the gateline, whilst at other times there’s one or even none. Like their driver deployment, I get the feeling GTR’s station staff deployment just isn’t particularly well organised from a management level.

 

[Magdalia]

Maybe they could hold it in the platform at Hitchin? There is a convenient 11 min gap between the Harrogate and Leeds services which would be enough for 1T50 to loop round it on the fast before taking the flyover. Assuming the ladder has the necessary crossover, I can't remember if it does.

Down trains heading for the branch non-stop use the down fast line between Woolmer Green and Hitchin, crossing to the slow line north of Hitchin to get to the flyover. There is no "loop round".

It just shows a fast to slow one at 31m 20ch.

Since 2018 this crossover has had much reduced usage. Most down trains calling at Hitchin run on the slow line from Woolmer Green, even if not calling at Knebworth or Stevenage.

In the evening peak the down platform at Hitchin has 4tph TL, 2tph Peterborough, 2tph Cambridge and the 2tph Letchworth. Risky to terminate trains on a platform which has that level of service. In essence it’s just moving the problem from one place to another.

Hitchin has only 1 down platform, and nowhere suitable to reverse. Terminating trains at Hitchin would make things worse not better.

Ideally, run all the trains to Cambridge - which, for one thing, gives people a better service and less of a wait if a 2Cxx is cancelled. 30 minute wait instead of 60 at many stations.

This won't happen either, because of lack of platform availability at Cambridge. Furthermore, if the evening peak ever expands back to pre covid levels, the trains will need to terminate at Letchworth to run empty back to Kings Cross to form another service.

 

[WeGoAgain]

But then you have people wanting to get to Letchworth wondering why they're being held at Hitchin when there's nothing ahead.

To be fair, this happens at various locations across the network. Ely Platform 2 has a train at a stand at the platform for several minutes (though not to let a train overtake) and Knebworth to Welwyn North on the Slow has the same thing, though this time may be somewhat used with the Train travelling towards the signal. The time will be advertised, so passengers will know what time they'd be booked to arrive at Letchworth.

To bramling's point as to whether there is the capacity to hold this train at Hitchin, that may be more of an issue.

 

[sharpener]

Down trains heading for the branch non-stop use the down fast line between Woolmer Green and Hitchin, crossing to the slow line north of Hitchin to get to the flyover. There is no "loop round".


Since 2018 this crossover has had much reduced usage. Most down trains calling at Hitchin run on the slow line from Woolmer Green, even if not calling at Knebworth or Stevenage.


Hitchin has only 1 down platform, and nowhere suitable to reverse. Terminating trains at Hitchin would make things worse not better.


This won't happen either, because of lack of platform availability at Cambridge. Furthermore, if the evening peak ever expands back to pre covid levels, the trains will need to terminate at Letchworth to run empty back to Kings Cross to form another service.

In that case it's a non-problem. I was thinking that the Cambridge trains, specifically 1T50, might be kept on the down slow bc of the disparity between its max speed and the Leeds and Harrogate services either side. (But I don't know what the permissible line speeds are between Woolmer Green and Cambridge Jnc are.) If they are in an orderly procession on the fast then holding 1L48 at Hitchin to avoid delaying 1T50 at Letchworth is trivial.

Yes it might annoy Letchworth pax but even they might understand that a service going as far as King's Lynn ought to have priority.

For all the reasons you state it had never crossed my mind to terminate 1L48 at Hitchin, that was a misapprehension by others.

Holding 1L48 on the flyover wouldn't make any sense either bc you then need a path over the old flat crossing, two if you let the Brighton - Cambridge referred to upthread overtake as well.

As you say the real solution is for ppl at Letchworth to get their fingers out.

 

[bramling]

Hitchin has only 1 down platform, and nowhere suitable to reverse. Terminating trains at Hitchin would make things worse not better.

This isn’t quite the case, as you could detrain at Hitchin and run empty to Letchworth to either stable or reverse, and there’s also the facility to run empty to Biggleswade and reverse there (the reversing move there has been used in comparatively recent timetables).

But I agree it isn’t really a solution, it’s just moving the problem from one location to another.

Really there either needs to be a change to the infrastructure (third platform at Letchworth), or more urgently GTR need to work on being able to empty out their trains quicker, especially the 387/379 fleet.

This won't happen either, because of lack of platform availability at Cambridge. Furthermore, if the evening peak ever expands back to pre covid levels, the trains will need to terminate at Letchworth to run empty back to Kings Cross to form another service.

I always thought the 2018 plan was remiss in not having a decent terminating point short of Cambridge. It was very heavily posted on here at the time that Hitchin to Cambridge would prove one of the biggest hindrances to reliable operation of the Thameslink Programme, and here we are.

 

[sharpener]

This isn’t quite the case, as you could detrain at Hitchin and run empty to Letchworth to either stable or reverse, and there’s also the facility to run empty to Biggleswade and reverse there (the reversing move there has been used in comparatively recent timetables).

Yes but assuming it would take the same time to detrain at Hitchin it would not help much as even if 1T90 overtakes it at Hitchin there are still 9S44 and 1P86 bearing down and both needing P2 there. The only benefit is that it would be quicker to clear the road at Letchworth.

I always thought the 2018 plan was remiss in not having a decent terminating point short of Cambridge.

It's a long time since I commuted from there and much has been ripped up in the interim but I noticed the other day there still seems to be a down loop at Royston, is it ever used for anything?

 

[GordonT]

Presumably there's no opportunity for the terminator to arrive slightly earlier at Letchworth? Slightly earlier departure from KGX or withdraw an intermediate call maybe?

 

[bramling]

Presumably there's no opportunity for the terminator to arrive slightly earlier at Letchworth? Slightly earlier departure from KGX or withdraw an intermediate call maybe?

Whilst it may or may not be possible to adjust the timetable, I’m not sure this is really the solution, as the moment there’s late or out of course running, you still have trains taking 8 minutes to empty out, and chances are stuff will be stacked up behind - and as has been stated, putting 8 minutes on a Kings Lynn train has a significant impact due to the single-line sections north of Littleport, again something which was flagged on here as a massive risk pre-2018.

GN needs to run on time in order for everything to work. FCC managed to do this, albeit with slightly fewer trains on the railway, although to be fair their peak timetables were pretty complex so what wasn’t there in numbers of trains probably was there in intricate calling patterns. By contrast GTR are increasingly sloppy operationally, and NR’s signalling is rough round the edges since the closure of King’s Cross PSB too.

You just can’t have a train taking 8 minutes to empty out on a congested railway. GTR need to throw resources at addressing this.

 

[jon0844]

Using more 700s would immediately speed up terminating a train, especially with just one member of staff. 387s (and 379s) are as slow as far older stock - perhaps more so with the need to use a key rather than just press a button for each coach.

I am not sure 8 minutes is common though; that sounds extraordinarily long and only if there are major issues getting someone off - or multiple people, given you take ages with one person then later find someone else and have to reset the clock so-to-speak.

 

[bramling]

Using more 700s would immediately speed up terminating a train, especially with just one member of staff. 387s (and 379s) are as slow as far older stock - perhaps more so with the need to use a key rather than just press a button for each coach.

I am not sure 8 minutes is common though; that sounds extraordinarily long and only if there are major issues getting someone off - or multiple people, given you take ages with one person then later find someone else and have to reset the clock so-to-speak.

I was surprised about the 8 minutes when I first read it on here, but having had the opportunity to watch it myself, I can see how it’s happening. There’s just zero urgency at all, in fact on the contrary.

The 365s certainly didn’t take that long.

GTR seem to run such a carousel with their station staff that it seems a proportion of their staff just have zero interest in being part of a functional railway. Same with the agency staff seen on gatelines.

 

[sharpener]

Presumably there's no opportunity for the terminator to arrive slightly earlier at Letchworth? Slightly earlier departure from KGX or withdraw an intermediate call maybe?

Alas no, the timetable is very busy at that time of day and P2 at Hitchin has trains calling or passing every few minutes as this extract for Hitchin shows (they were mostly doing pretty well keeping to time today!)



However 1L48 was again 2 3/4 mins late, so although IT50 was 3/4 min early at Hitchin it got held up and left Letchworth 3 1/2 down and the 9S44 following it was 3 down.

 

[jon0844]

I was surprised about the 8 minutes when I first read it on here, but having had the opportunity to watch it myself, I can see how it’s happening. There’s just zero urgency at all, in fact on the contrary.

The 365s certainly didn’t take that long.

GTR seem to run such a carousel with their station staff that it seems a proportion of their staff just have zero interest in being part of a functional railway. Same with the agency staff seen on gatelines.

A 387 should be as quick as a 365, but you need a T-key for each button so I'd think it would be ever so slightly slower. 700s with terminal mode are a breeze. The risk is that some bright spark decides that a 700 needs less time to terminate, and then you have even less of a margin because they'll have another train booked to call 2 minutes later!

The real issue now is the huge number of people who are of no fixed abode, refusing to get off, and not even being cooperative if and when BTP arrive. They have no respect for anyone. Sometimes they have loads of bags, a bike or e-scooter etc.

Letchworth should absolutely have travel safe officers to assist in physically manhandling people off the train at the very least if they need the line cleared quickly.

 

[sharpener]

I am not sure 8 minutes is common though; that sounds extraordinarily long and only if there are major issues getting someone off - or multiple people, given you take ages with one person then later find someone else and have to reset the clock so-to-speak.

Not 8 mins tonight but if you start 1 1/2 mins late and then take 6 1/4 mins to do it the effect is the same.

The t/t allows 4 mins from arriving in the platform to leaving again with no-one aboard, which they clearly cannot achieve on a regular basis with their present level of staffing/competence/urgency.

 

[Magdalia]

It's a long time since I commuted from there and much has been ripped up in the interim but I noticed the other day there still seems to be a down loop at Royston, is it ever used for anything?

The loop at Royston still exists, but it isn't wired. It is mainly used by railhead treatment trains.

Using more 700s would immediately speed up terminating a train, especially with just one member of staff. 387s (and 379s) are as slow as far older stock - perhaps more so with the need to use a key rather than just press a button for each coach.

I was surprised about the 8 minutes when I first read it on here, but having had the opportunity to watch it myself, I can see how it’s happening. There’s just zero urgency at all, in fact on the contrary.

The 365s certainly didn’t take that long.

This is an important point. Classes 317 and 365 were quick to clear out because each coach could be locked just by pressing a button on the end bulkhead. Another factor is sightlines within each coach which are much more obstructed in class 387 than classes 317 or 365. Also modern toilets with electronic door operation take longer to check.

700s with terminal mode are a breeze.

The obvious solution is to run the trains with class 700. This would also improve punctuality with reduced dwell times.

My reading of the December 2025 draft timetable is that it will be possible to eliminate most of the mixing of trains coming into Kings Cross on stoppers and going out on fasts, and vice versa, This should make it easier to run the Letchworth terminating trains with class 700s.

 

[MikeWM]

Last couple of nights have actually worked well - both times 1L48 has arrived at Letchworth ahead of time, and moved off for the sidings just 3 minutes after arriving.

As a result 1T50 has been on time, two nights running! Which feels like a minor miracle, especially going for it tonight and actually seeing it turn up on time at Cambridge North.

Hopefully this continues...

 

[Robski]

Last couple of nights have actually worked well - both times 1L48 has arrived at Letchworth ahead of time, and moved off for the sidings just 3 minutes after arriving.

As a result 1T50 has been on time, two nights running! Which feels like a minor miracle, especially going for it tonight and actually seeing it turn up on time at Cambridge North.

Hopefully this continues...

Could be related to the fact that on both days the service was operated using 700/0's instead of 379's.