Counterproductive regulation

[Highlandspring]

Or the Controller was dealing with another train and missed this one ? It does happen.
The signaller can see what is happening on their patch and should either use a bit of common sense or ask instead of waiting to be told.
Regulation of trains shouldn’t be a Control to Signaller only process. The signaller should think/ask occasionally

^^ This x100. The TRC has a far bigger section to manage then the signallers and can't watch every junction all the time.

 

[northernchris]

Just to clarify, is it Network Rail who makes the decisions as to which trains leave in which order? Last week I was on a Leeds-Selby service, due to depart at xx55. The xx48 Hull was due in at xx01 so the stopper was held for this. The Hull left at xx04 however the Selby left at xx05 despite the xx08 Crosscountry being in the station and ready to leave. If the Selby was allowed the leave on time, although it would have caused further delay to the Hull service, would have prevented delaying the Crosscountry and following TPE to Middlesbrough which also got caught in the congestion. Delaying 3 more trainloads of passengers did seem a bit of a strange decision, especially letting the Northern out just ahead of the Crosscountry

 

[Sunset route]

Or the Controller was dealing with another train and missed this one ? It does happen.
The signaller can see what is happening on their patch and should either use a bit of common sense or ask instead of waiting to be told.
Regulation of trains shouldn’t be a Control to Signaller only process. The signaller should think/ask occasionally

We don’t deal directly with controllers, that task is left to the SSMs, we just do our job to the best of our abilities with the information provided.

 

[45107]

Just to clarify, is it Network Rail who makes the decisions as to which trains leave in which order? Last week I was on a Leeds-Selby service, due to depart at xx55. The xx48 Hull was due in at xx01 so the stopper was held for this. The Hull left at xx04 however the Selby left at xx05 despite the xx08 Crosscountry being in the station and ready to leave. If the Selby was allowed the leave on time, although it would have caused further delay to the Hull service, would have prevented delaying the Crosscountry and following TPE to Middlesbrough which also got caught in the congestion. Delaying 3 more trainloads of passengers did seem a bit of a strange decision, especially letting the Northern out just ahead of the Crosscountry

Network Rail ultimately make the decision.
A TOC may make specific regulation requests for their services or even priority over other TOCs in certain circumstances
Regulating policies exist at key location but these generally relate to specific services and don’t work when a number of trains are late running.
It seems then that trains are run in booked order or certain TOCs get priority at the expense of right time trains with similar stopping patterns etc.

 

[Sunset route]

All this proves is regulating is not an exact science and it’s a complex beast in the modern railway, no one size fits all and there are as many ways of interpreting it as there are signallers and train running controllers out there.

 

[Starmill]

Delaying 3 more trainloads of passengers did seem a bit of a strange decision, especially letting the Northern out just ahead of the Crosscountry

Hm. So the xx55 is going out just behind the xx12 Middlesbrough service? Was this bang on time? So call that a xx15 departure if we're allowing the Middlesbrough first. That's a 20 minute delay. The Selby service then may get struck at Micklefield if there is an on time train making an opposing move. At this point we have no idea whatsoever what might be happening at Selby in respect of crossing into platform 3 when we are arriving more than 20 minutes late. And regardless of how that goes, the back working from Selby will definitely be having a few minutes late start.

 

[45107]

All this proves is regulating is not an exact science and it’s a complex beast in the modern railway, no one size fits all and there are as many ways of interpreting it as there are signallers and train running controllers out there.

Correct. And for it work effectively, it relies on those who can see what is happening at a local level (the signaller) to manage it or ask/make suggestions instead of relying on others to suggest it

 

[northernchris]

Hm. So the xx55 is going out just behind the xx12 Middlesbrough service? Was this bang on time? So call that a xx15 departure if we're allowing the Middlesbrough first. That's a 20 minute delay. The Selby service then may get struck at Micklefield if there is an on time train making an opposing move. At this point we have no idea whatsoever what might be happening at Selby in respect of crossing into platform 3 when we are arriving more than 20 minutes late. And regardless of how that goes, the back working from Selby will definitely be having a few minutes late start.

No, the xx55 left at xx06 I think, just ahead of the xx08 Crosscountry. However that train had a slow run following the stopper, causing the Middlesbrough to catch it up. Despite the Northern being ready to leave on time, it was the delay to the Hull service, due at xx48 which caused the late start

 

[BRblue]

Correct. And for it work effectively, it relies on those who can see what is happening at a local level (the signaller) to manage it or ask/make suggestions instead of relying on others to suggest it

And what makes you think that question are never asked and suggestions made? We ask them all the time!

 

[whhistle]

I could see from 80 miles away on my phone what looked the more obvious solution; obviously I may have been unaware of other considerations, and I didn't intend to get hung up on this particular incident but it's still the principle that baffles me - the principle that railways are run on the basis of compensation for delays, rather than minimising delays.

But they're not "run on the basis of compensation for delays".
Remember, express trains don't have priority over stopping trains, if certain conditions are met.

There is absolutely nothing stopping you speaking to Network Rail as an interested party, rather than a complainant and asking them why the regulation action was performed like that.

Another solution could be that the signaller just didn't think?
I've seen what I would consider mistakes with routing and pathing all the time. Signallers are human, and thus are prone to mistakes / not seeing the bigger picture all the time.

 

[whhistle]

Today I got the 1404 EMT service from Derby to London (as far as Leicester) which departed on time.
At Trent South we were stopped because the 1345 from Nottingham to London had departed on time but somehow managed to lose 14 minutes by East Mids Parkway.
It left Leicester 15 minutes late and never recovered it's lost time.

So you're suggesting the stopper should have gone in front of the express?
Which is the opposite query of the OP!

Perhaps the signaller thought the 13:45 from Nottingham may have made up 4 minutes (which is doable) to come in under PPM of 10 mins late at STP.

 

[43055]

Today I got the 1404 EMT service from Derby to London (as far as Leicester) which departed on time.
At Trent South we were stopped because the 1345 from Nottingham to London had departed on time but somehow managed to lose 14 minutes by East Mids Parkway. We followed it to Leicester, chasing yellows, being stopped again at Loughborough and approaching Leicester Station.
At Leicester, the ex-Derby train was delayed further because a number of people thought it was the 1439 stopping service to London, they boarded and had to get off again when it was announced that it was non-stop to London. It left Leicester 15 minutes late and never recovered it's lost time.

The point is, the late running service from Nottingham could have been held at Trent to let the 1404 ex-Derby go first because there were no connections to speak of. However, they would have arrived at St. Pancras in the wrong order and probably cocked up the returning departures from there. The ex-Nottingham service just got later and later (according to RTT) and was almost 30 down by STP.

Should they have been regulated or was it a case of booked order rules!

It is not unheard off for regulation like this. It even happens at Leicester where one service can be held for the late running service to pass. It is probably to make sure the arrive into London in the correct order as some 222 services share platforms so arriving in the wrong order would mean they would have to leave in the wrong order as well.

 

[Starmill]

No, the xx55 left at xx06 I think, just ahead of the xx08 Crosscountry. However that train had a slow run following the stopper, causing the Middlesbrough to catch it up. Despite the Northern being ready to leave on time, it was the delay to the Hull service, due at xx48 which caused the late start

Yes exactly. So if the Selby stopper had waited for the CrossCountry, then what I posted would have been the likely outcome.

 

[northernchris]

Yes exactly. So if the Selby stopper had waited for the CrossCountry, then what I posted would have been the likely outcome.

Ah, sorry! Yes, it would have caused a delay to the return working, but to allow a stopper out 2 minutes ahead of an express, but equally holding it 9 mins for a late running train did seem a poor decision

 

[Mugby]

So you're suggesting the stopper should have gone in front of the express?
Which is the opposite query of the OP!

Perhaps the signaller thought the 13:45 from Nottingham may have made up 4 minutes (which is doable) to come in under PPM of 10 mins late at STP.

No, I wasn't suggesting that. I was saying that because the 1404 ex-Derby arrived in Leicester, Plat.3. at about the time the stopper (1412 ex-Nottm) was due, poor platform work and lack of announcements meant that people boarded and had to get off again, this added to the delay.
Platform 4 at Leicester wasn't available because a Newark service was standing in it.

The 1345 ex-Nottm. was only 4 minutes late at Trent but managed to lose a further 10 minutes between there and East Mids. Park., a distance of only a mile and a half. I was suggesting that, ideally, the 1404 ex-Derby should have gone ahead of it but, hindsight and all that!

 

[Ianigsy]

Just to clarify, is it Network Rail who makes the decisions as to which trains leave in which order? Last week I was on a Leeds-Selby service, due to depart at xx55. The xx48 Hull was due in at xx01 so the stopper was held for this. The Hull left at xx04 however the Selby left at xx05 despite the xx08 Crosscountry being in the station and ready to leave. If the Selby was allowed the leave on time, although it would have caused further delay to the Hull service, would have prevented delaying the Crosscountry and following TPE to Middlesbrough which also got caught in the congestion. Delaying 3 more trainloads of passengers did seem a bit of a strange decision, especially letting the Northern out just ahead of the Crosscountry

Pretty much the same thing happened to me yesterday heading for Selby- I was planning to take the 1348 TPE but this was delayed while the 1355 Selby arrived within a minute of time so I took that (it was also a 150+156 so would almost certainly have been more comfortable than the 185). It was held for firstly a Newcastle TPE and then the late-running Hull and arrived at Selby at 1442 against a timetabled arrival of 1430 and departure at 1452- checking RTT it looks as if the Hull TPE picked up further delays during the stops at Garforth and Selby and actually lost more time, only clearing Selby a minute or two before the stopper arrived.