Missing stops to make up time

[2192]

Is missing stops to make up time so the return working is not delayed a new idea? Did British Rail do it?

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

It’s become more common in privatisation, namely because of the density of services on certain routes, the tightness of diagrams to maximise resource utilisation and lack of spare stock and crew on standby to take over a late-running diagram. The effectiveness of these delay recovery measures varies by route; I guess in some ways removing stops is a gamble by Control to try and recover the timetable to avoid causing bigger problems later on in the turn, but often depends on the late running train getting a clear run to be able to make up time, rather than just getting stuck behind something else and not regaining anything.

 

[30907]

Is missing stops to make up time so the return working is not delayed a new idea? Did British Rail do it?

No and yes respectively, certainly on the SR in the 70s.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Are TOCs penalised/fined if a percentage of their services don't arrive at their destinations on time?

 

[Kite159]

Are TOCs penalised/fined if a percentage of their services don't arrive at their destinations on time?

Didn't it change to be after every stop if the train was more than so many minutes late, so with routes with many stops it will be cheaper to rip out a few station stops to get the train back on time even if the passengers at the stations where the train skips have a longer wait

Ie SWR running a Shepperton - Waterloo fast to New Malden then the usual stations

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

Manchester Airport - Llandudno services where often late arriving which in turn then delayed the return service also, they alleviated this by having the train do Manchester Airport - Llandudno - Llandudno Junction - Llandudno - Manchester Airport, by adding the short return shuttle journey into the schedule if the train was running particularly late they would just cancel the shuttle leg of the journey and head straight back to Manchester from Llandudno on schedule.

 

[Horizon22]

Are TOCs penalised/fined if a percentage of their services don't arrive at their destinations on time?

Any delay minutes, fail to stops or cancellations (so long as they are attributed to the TOC) lead to fines to varying degrees.

Can't comment on British Rail times but I imagine it did - disruption still occurred and there was still a timetable to meet.

 

[CW2]

It was pretty common practice on the Glasgow Electric services in the 1980s. Missing out a few lightly-used stops would benefit the majority, but if over done then those affected by the changed service pattern could get quite vocal ...

 

[Nova1]

I'd be surprised if there's any TOCs that don't do this.

A few weeks ago my train ran direct from my stop to the terminus (where I wanted to get off), because it was running very late. Turned a 20 minute journey into about an 8 minute journey. Shame that won't happen every day...

 

[IanXC]

It’s become more common in privatisation, namely because of the density of services on certain routes, the tightness of diagrams to maximise resource utilisation and lack of spare stock and crew on standby to take over a late-running diagram. The effectiveness of these delay recovery measures varies by route; I guess in some ways removing stops is a gamble by Control to try and recover the timetable to avoid causing bigger problems later on in the turn, but often depends on the late running train getting a clear run to be able to make up time, rather than just getting stuck behind something else and not regaining anything.

Another effect to be remembered is that if a stopper is suitably delayed that the next express is at risk of being delayed by it (either with no overtaking opportunity, or where this would make the stopper so late as to be unacceptable) cancelling stops typically moves the stopper to a similar running time to the express.

 

[zwk500]

Turned a 20 minute journey into about an 8 minute journey. Shame that won't happen every day...

The other side of this is last Monday, where the first train ran non-stop through my station and the second stopped but was running fast to London, so I had to wait for the train 1 hour after the one I had intended to. It's normally a 4-minute journey.

 

[Nova1]

The other side of this is last Monday, where the first train ran non-stop through my station and the second stopped but was running fast to London, so I had to wait for the train 1 hour after the one I had intended to. It's normally a 4-minute journey.

yes of course this week the exact opposite happened to me, train sped past me because it was changed very last minute to skip because of delays. that was a very cold wait...

 

[Bevan Price]

Whether or not it is allowed should depend on the timetable frequency, and the length of time that inconvenienced passengers will need to wait. If trains are nominally, say, every 15 minutes, then it is probably OK for one train to skip a few stops. However, if passengers are going to be delayed for an hour or more, then skipping stops is unforgiveable. Stuff the timetable and possible consequential delays -- leaving people stranded, often on bleak, unwelcoming platforms, should never be permitted. Likewise, on "frequent" services, never should 2 or 3 consecutive trains be permitted to skip stops.

Operators need to remember that trains exist for the passengers, not the convenience of rail companies.

 

[ComUtoR]

Operators need to remember that trains exist for the passengers

Which passengers ?

 

[Deafdoggie]

Which passengers ?

All, not just the ones on a dry warm train, but those stranded on a cold wet platform too

 

[WestRiding]

A good reason not to buy a house in Rotherham or rely on Rotherham Central. It's the first place that usually gets knocked out if a service is late, particularly to or from the Dearn Valley.

 

[_toommm_]

A good reason not to buy a house in Rotherham or rely on Rotherham Central. It's the first place that usually gets knocked out if a service is late, particularly to or from the Dearn Valley.

There’s also lots of other reasons not to buy a house in Rotherham, principally that it is Rotherham. Unless you’re in one of the outer villages like Whiston or Wickersley or Moorgate, it’s not the best place.

 

[WestRiding]

There’s also lots of other reasons not to buy a house in Rotherham, principally that it is Rotherham. Unless you’re in one of the outer villages like Whiston or Wickersley or Moorgate, it’s not the best place.

Snob (but I agree)

 

[jfollows]

Is missing stops to make up time so the return working is not delayed a new idea? Did British Rail do it?

I commuted into Manchester from Poynton and then Macclesfield 1973-1980 and I don't ever recall missing stops to make up time.
It could well be that the turn-round time was more generous than it is now, so the time saving wasn't really needed.
The service was pretty frequent, a train every 10-15 minutes in the peaks then, totally different from now, so the impact of missing a stop then wouldn't have been as great as it now would be.
I just feel that it wasn't a solution in the armoury of "control" at the time, and it's a pretty passenger-unfriendly thing to do without a method of interacting with passengers - no way for the guard or driver to talk to the passengers, no platform departure indicators which can be updated to display messages. There were more station staff then.
I thinkn logistically it wouldn't have been easy to do at short notice back then. The fact that it can be done now might be annoying to some people, for sure.

 

[Sussex hammer]

Was on a Brighton - Ore train a couple of months ago. The train was delayed coming out of Brighton (think it was over 20 mins). As we were approaching Hastings, the conductor (or whatever they are called now) announced that the train was terminating at Hastings.

A chap who used to be employed at our company commuted from Hampden Park to Ore each day and it happened often that the train either terminated at Hastings or when he was travelling home, the train from Ore had been cancelled so he had to make his own way to Hastings to get home or wait around until a train arrived.

I am guessing that it is far cheaper to terminate the train at Hastings and try to make up time than to carry on to Ore and continue running late.

We didn't bother with any delay pay claim with Southern and I don't think the chap did either.

 

[Galvanize]

Used to be quite common in the old Southern Metro timetable if things were late a few years back. Trains routed via Peckham and Dulwich would usually run “Fast” from London Bridge to Tulse Hill to make up time.

London Bridge-Caterham stoppers via Forest Hill would usually go fast to Norwood Junction, but sometimes leave a New Cross Gate stop in, so that passengers could change onto London Overground services if they wanted the intermediate stations. They’d stop on the slow line, and get turned out onto the Fast Lines so as not to be stuck behind a LO 378, and then get turned in just before Norwood junction. If things were running desperately late, it would sometimes be Fast to East Croydon!

 

[jamesst]

Operators need to remember that trains exist for the passengers, not the convenience of rail companies.

On the other hand getting a delay sorted early rather than letting it drag onto consecutive journeys and probably causing delays to other services could be argued as looking after those same passengers.

 

[Falcon1200]

On the other hand getting a delay sorted early rather than letting it drag onto consecutive journeys and probably causing delays to other services could be argued as looking after those same passengers.

Yes, and that is why Control terminate trains short or run them express; To restore normal service as quickly as possible and therefore cause disruption to the least number of passengers. But it does have to be done properly, ie with all concerned advised in plenty of time, and taking account of factors such as service frequency.

 

[_toommm_]

Snob (but I agree)

I grew up in Rotherham and lived there for eighteen of my current 22 year life, so I’m speaking from experience

 

[TEW]

Didn't it change to be after every stop if the train was more than so many minutes late, so with routes with many stops it will be cheaper to rip out a few station stops to get the train back on time even if the passengers at the stations where the train skips have a longer wait

Ie SWR running a Shepperton - Waterloo fast to New Malden then the usual stations

Yes, although I don't know if all TOCs have moved over to the new system yet. Skip stopping was never uncommon on SWR, but the new T-3 system has certainly lead to an increase in the use. It's a delay of 3 minutes or more at any station now that is counted as late. Skipping stations is probably a necessary evil to recover the service, especially on the SWR network, but sometimes the way it is done on SWR is perplexing, with little time made up.

 

[Watershed]

Yes, although I don't know if all TOCs have moved over to the new system yet. Skip stopping was never uncommon on SWR, but the new T-3 system has certainly lead to an increase in the use. It's a delay of 3 minutes or more at any station now that is counted as late. Skipping stations is probably a necessary evil to recover the service, especially on the SWR network, but sometimes the way it is done on SWR is perplexing, with little time made up.

Though T-3 only carries a very small incentive, compared to T-15. And of course any station which a train skips will count as both a T-3 and T-15 failure.

T-3/15 is certainly a move in the right direction but it needs to be weighted by passenger volumes, and for there to be much larger figures at play, before it starts incentivising regulation that's in the best interests of the highest number of passengers.

 

[nanstallon]

Whether or not it is allowed should depend on the timetable frequency, and the length of time that inconvenienced passengers will need to wait. If trains are nominally, say, every 15 minutes, then it is probably OK for one train to skip a few stops. However, if passengers are going to be delayed for an hour or more, then skipping stops is unforgiveable. Stuff the timetable and possible consequential delays -- leaving people stranded, often on bleak, unwelcoming platforms, should never be permitted. Likewise, on "frequent" services, never should 2 or 3 consecutive trains be permitted to skip stops.

Operators need to remember that trains exist for the passengers, not the convenience of rail companies.

Totally agree. It's a disgusting practice.

 

[tiptoptaff]

Totally agree. It's a disgusting practice.

No it isn't.