Trains skipping stations when they are less than 5 minutes late

[43066]

Yes ... but none of this excess caution seems to apply when the train shortly before departure is non-stopped differently to the timetable in the first place

Depending on the situation it’ll involve platform staff writing out and giving special stop orders/not to call orders to both driver and guard, or else someone (either signaller or control) contacting the driver via the GSMR. Generally it’ll not be done lightly!

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Generally it’ll not be done lightly!

No doubt, but it certainly seems, from a fare-paying passenger's point of view, that the railway would often prefer to operate trains which don't call at intermediate stations (so as to allow passengers to board / alight) and for reasons that aren't always well communicated.

 

[davethebus002@]

Depends which stations were skipped. If it’s Raynes Park north, then plenty of time to change and wait for one behind making the stop while the original runs fast. If they’re skipping stations on the branch then that’s not so great.



That is literally challenging. It may be a nice and polite way of challenging, but it’s challenging. As another poster said, by the time wait for another person to answer, check it can happen, repass the new info back, it’s just going to take longer. The line has to be drawn somewhere.

Also, I appreciate people have places to be and times to be there by, but this is London/just outside London. This is not like cancelling the last train of the day from Inverness to Wick half way and stranding everyone at a Scottish halt with no onward travel.

No I agree that but it's happening on that line day in day out as soon as a service leaves one end 3 or 4 mins late its skip out 4 or 5 stops its pathetic

 

[30907]

Unless NRE is wrong, the stops were not reinstated. The following train was eirher, as you say, not cancelled, or it was cancelled but then reinstated.

Looking again, the train skipped Teddington to New Malden inclusive, and the following Roundabout was indeed cancelled. I was misled by the OP's reference to the late start from Shepperton.

 

[davethebus002@]

I once had a situation where train staff had been told to run fast during disruption but no one else so train station boards were not updated.

It was something like the 7:34 Guildford to Waterloo via the New Line Guildford. I wanted to alight at New Malden but that stop was cancelled. So I got out at Surbtion and when I helpfully informed a member of platform staff, they weren't impressed by the situation.

Twitter staff seemed to think nothing was wrong because unless they are told by control it can't be.

As it turned out, the train stopped at New Malden.

That is very rare though.


The thing is, don't the government take the revenue risk?


Unless NRE is wrong, the stops were not reinstated. The following train was eirher, as you say, not cancelled, or it was cancelled but then reinstated.

The following train from Teddington was cancelled it was the Kingston rounder one not the next Shepperton one 10.00 Waterloo to waterloo

Skipping stations after the journey has started is a major hzard for disabled people. They may well be content that they can manage their planned stations independently and so have not arranged assistance , but to find that they now have negotiate an unfamiliar station and change trains is a different ask entirely.

For the sake of 2 or 3 mins it shouldn't be skipping any

 

[MotCO]

If the driver realises that the service is running less than 5 minutes late, could the driver ignore the non-stop instruction and call at the normal stations? Or is this a 'tea without biscuits' meeting?

 

[embers25]

Never seen SWR skip Cranbrook even though it's not a major station

0552 often runs non stop Honiton to Exeter when late and did last week as it has a very tight turnround

 

[43066]

No doubt, but it certainly seems, from a fare-paying passenger's point of view, that the railway would often prefer to operate trains which don't call at intermediate stations (so as to allow passengers to board / alight) and for reasons that aren't always well communicated.

It’s generally only done where the train in question will be on time (or closer to it) for far more fare paying passengers than are inconvenienced.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

It’s generally only done where the train in question will be on time (or closer to it) for far more fare paying passengers than are inconvenienced.

Even when the train is less than five minutes late, as per the thread title?

 

[43066]

Even when the train is less than five minutes late, as per the thread title?

Obviously not. As already stated, that was clearly done in error, or due to circumstances changing unexpectedly after the decision had been taken.

It’s hardly a common occurrence, and the same people who moan about trains missing stations to make up time will invariably also moan about trains being late.

 

[Joey Beauchamp]

Yes, as the banner repeaters are interlocked with signals, so can be treated as a definitive indication of a proceed aspect.

St. Albans and Wellingborough on the down are other MML locations where waiting at the banner happens from time to time.

Could the driver (in conjunction with the guard if applicable) open the doors if safely platformed? Or would that break some kind of rule?

 

[43066]

Could the driver (in conjunction with the guard if applicable) open the doors if safely platformed? Or would that break some kind of rule?

If you’re just being held at a red, not really. You’d then be stopping out of course, and what if someone boards the train wanting a different destination etc. It’s almost always going to be easiest to wait outside.

If there’s likely to be an extended delay (eg because the train in front has struck a person) it is generally better to stop in a platform, release the doors, and allow people the option of getting off the train.

 

[davethebus002@]

Obviously not. As already stated, that was clearly done in error, or due to circumstances changing unexpectedly after the decision had been taken.

It’s hardly a common occurrence, and the same people who moan about trains missing stations to make up time will invariably also moan about trains being late.

No one minds a train skipping stations if its very late but this thread is about a train that left the terminus 2 minutes late then dumped passengers at a station with a 27 minute wait as the following train was cancelled you may make excuses for this poor practice but most dont

 

[renegademaster]

It used to happen on the west croydon overground service constantly before covid but have not had it since

 

[43066]

No one minds a train skipping stations if its very late but this thread is about a train that left the terminus 2 minutes late then dumped passengers at a station with a 27 minute wait as the following train was cancelled you may make excuses for this poor practice but most dont

Actually people on here do regularly complain about trains skipping stops, even when very late (despite the fact it can often be an alternative to cancellation). As for the situation you’ve described, things go wrong sometimes, that’s just life!

Waiting a whole 27 minutes is hardly the end of the world, and I’m surprised it’s worthy of a thread. You can claim the cost of the journey back via delay repay, and I bet it was still quicker then driving or taking the bus from Shepperton to Waterloo at 10am on a weekday….

 

[Idiotic]

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

 

[MP33]

I have just returned from a trip to Bournemouth. On the way down we were all chucked off at Southampton Central. The next train skipped five local stations. I thought if I was a local resident, I would not be very pleased.

 

[Horizon22]

Perhaps they shouldn't make these decisions until they know the train is actually late not pre determine that it might be. The passengers are deemed to be a nuisance it seems

That's definitely not ideal - telling passengers before departure is preferable.

SWR up to their usual tricks of ripping out stops to pay out less money?

That has literally nothing to do with it.

In this case, the delay I imagine was anticipated to be longer and for whatever reason it turned out not to be. Control for example will often work around minimum breaks if train crew have been delayed on inward journeys or are due a set break or are late to the train for other reasons (e.g.delayed in traffic booking on). You then work around that information, develop plans, let everyone know (signallers, station staff, Network Rail staff, other crew) and commit the decision. Then for whatever reasons the crew aren't as delayed or what was anticipated to be a problem isn't any more.

Sometimes it is more difficult to reverse because of the confusion it then causes (although on the contrary I regular see running fast decisions reversed). So it's not ideal and often decisions aren't made for such small lateness even on the most intensive metro railways but it can occasionally happen.

If the driver realises that the service is running less than 5 minutes late, could the driver ignore the non-stop instruction and call at the normal stations? Or is this a 'tea without biscuits' meeting?

Yes ignoring such an instruction having confirmed it via either a written not to call / special stop order or via a verbal communication with a controller/signaller would certainly raise some eyebrows without a very good justification (likely safety grounds).

 

[43066]

Control for example will often work around minimum breaks if train crew have been delayed on inward journeys or are due a set break or are late to the train for other reasons (e.g.delayed in traffic booking on). You then work around that information, develop plans, let everyone know (signallers, station staff, Network Rail staff, other crew) and commit the decision. Then for whatever reasons the crew aren't as delayed or what was anticipated to be a problem isn't any more.

Indeed. I suspect this was an error, or due to delays not being as long as expected, but it could be a case of getting an out and back working within a driver’s day, as the booked stopping pattern would take them over it, and result in cancellation of both journeys due to no crew.

Yes ignoring such an instruction having confirmed it via either a written not to call / special stop order or via a verbal communication with a controller/signaller would certainly raise some eyebrows.

You’d need a very good reason, and to have told the signaller (and preferably control via the guard) what you were doing. Otherwise you would be treated as stopping out of course, which is a (minor) operational incident in its own right.

 

[30907]

The following train from Teddington was cancelled it was the Kingston rounder one not the next Shepperton one 10.00 Waterloo to waterloo

Thanks for confirming. Looking further, the outward working left Waterloo 12 late and ran fast (on the Fast line!) to Wimbledon then Norbiton, whence it was 6 late.
I agree the decision for the Up working was odd.

 

[TEW]

The problem with Shepperton services is constant tight turnarounds at both ends all day. Without some skipping of stops even a 5 minute delay can be difficult to recover.

 

[Lurcheroo]

If TFW short form a busy service to Birmingham and it only runs as 2 cars then it will be pretty much chock full leaving Shrewsbury so a lot of conductors will ask control for a ‘not to stop’ for Wellington and Telford as there will be an unrealistic amount of passengers trying to board an already full service so they will often grant it as there is a WMT stopper 10 minutes behind, meaning you run fast to Wolves sailing through stations at the correct time or even early.

 

[snookertam]

Not allowed in Scotland unless under exceptional circumstances.

 

[Kite159]

The problem with Shepperton services is constant tight turnarounds at both ends all day. Without some skipping of stops even a 5 minute delay can be difficult to recover.

The solution is to try and rewrite the timetable for that branch so instead of having tight turnarounds the turnarounds are more like 15 minutes, introducing an extra unit into that route.

If TFW short form a busy service to Birmingham and it only runs as 2 cars then it will be pretty much chock full leaving Shrewsbury so a lot of conductors will ask control for a ‘not to stop’ for Wellington and Telford as there will be an unrealistic amount of passengers trying to board an already full service so they will often grant it as there is a WMT stopper 10 minutes behind, meaning you run fast to Wolves sailing through stations at the correct time or even early.

Until you get a passenger who wanted to travel to Wellington/Telford finding themselves on a trip to Wolverhampton as they were unable to get off the train in time.

----

SWR have a nasty habit of ripping out the Andover call on the Exeter - London trains when they are running late (which due to the single track nature of the West of England line delays can easily build up), which is fine until they also cancel the stopper and pull the same trick to the following London train.

 

[43066]

The solution is to try and rewrite the timetable for that branch so instead of having tight turnarounds the turnarounds are more like 15 minutes, introducing an extra unit into that route.

Which would mean taking a unit from somewhere else, and therefore rewriting the timetable to thin out (ie worsen) the service elsewhere.

Where would you suggest?!

 

[Kite159]

Which would mean taking a unit from somewhere else, and therefore rewriting the timetable to thin out (ie worsen) the service elsewhere.

Where would you suggest?!

Using one of the units which only pops out to work a single peak time service. Although nothing will change until more of the newer 701s enter service.

Similar to what GWR had to do with the Reading - Basingstoke services on Mondays - Saturdays when the timetable got changed to cater for the call at Reading Green Park, just look at the Sunday timetable to see how 1tph using 1 train gets delayed throughout the day and can't recover the delay due to tight turnarounds.

 

[GordonT]

Not allowed in Scotland unless under exceptional circumstances.

For a long while it was the first resort in order to get a late runner back on schedule but after a lot of bad PR in the media it is now more of a last resort. Of course the payback is a greater tendency for the next booked working of a late runner to be cancelled in its entirety with the stock completing the journey as ECS and regaining time on its diagram in so doing.

 

[43066]

Using one of the units which only pops out to work a single peak time service. Although nothing will change until more of the newer 701s enter service.

Are you in a position to know whether there are crews and resources to do that? It has been discussed on the 701 thread that it might take a couple of years or more for the full 701 fleet to be introduced.

I think you underestimate how thinly spread resources (both in terms of crew and rolling stock) are on the railway.

 

[davethebus002@]

Which would mean taking a unit from somewhere else, and therefore rewriting the timetable to thin out (ie worsen) the service elsewhere.

Where would you suggest?!

Run as 4 or 5 cars not 8 or 10 there's your extra units.They happily run 5 cars on Weymouth trains so a short journey wouldn't be that much of a problem

 

[Kite159]

Are you in a position to know whether there are crews and resources to do that? It has been discussed on the 701 thread that it might take a couple of years or more for the full 701 fleet to be introduced.

I think you underestimate how thinly spread resources (both in terms of crew and rolling stock) are on the railway.

So as you are clearly the expert, what would you do to make the Shepperton services more reliable so they don't have to skip-stop all the time and hence being more appealing to passengers who otherwise might simply decide to use a bus?