Why do some trains skip out stops for apparently no reason?

[greatkingrat]

Middlewood actually has higher usage figures than Furness Vale even with only half the services. So maybe they should be skipping Furness Vale instead?

 

[Kite159]

Middlewood actually has higher usage figures than Furness Vale even with only half the services. So maybe they should be skipping Furness Vale instead?

Although how much of that usage is down to people splitting at Middlewood due to being the boundary of Greater Manchester (similar to Strines & Glazebrook).

 

[Dr Hoo]

Given that Middlewood isn't anywhere 'in itself', surely the main reason for using it is to go for a walk? Fair enough but it easy enough to walk to Rose Hill Marple or a rather longer hike to Macclesfield along the former railway line trail. Obviously there are other local walk possibilities to Disley, New Mills, Poynton and so on.

Loads of people used to walk from Edale station in the days when it only had a two-hourly service.

 

[mangyiscute]

Given that Middlewood isn't anywhere 'in itself', surely the main reason for using it is to go for a walk? Fair enough but it easy enough to walk to Rose Hill Marple or a rather longer hike to Macclesfield along the former railway line trail. Obviously there are other local walk possibilities to Disley, New Mills, Poynton and so on.

Loads of people used to walk from Edale station in the days when it only had a two-hourly service.

Or we could provide it with an hourly service and more passengers would come - when you are going for a walk, frequency is vital as its hard to predict what time you will get back to the station so the more frequent the trains, the less potential wait. There's no reason not to try an hourly service at each for a few years, and I reckon theres a 90% chance that the extra passengers would pay for any of the marginal costs

 

[jfollows]

Or we could provide it with an hourly service and more passengers would come - when you are going for a walk, frequency is vital as its hard to predict what time you will get back to the station so the more frequent the trains, the less potential wait. There's no reason not to try an hourly service at each for a few years, and I reckon theres a 90% chance that the extra passengers would pay for any of the marginal costs

I agree completely.
I'm planning on walking from Middlewood in the near future; that there's only a train every two hours is annoying but I can accommodate this in my plans. However I would never plan on walking to Middlewood because I'd not want to just miss a train and have to wait two hours for the next one.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

From the time that the last TPE service from Manchester to Doncaster was first introduced it was booked via Woodburn Jn. As a result the stop hasn't been added even though it has changed, and it still goes that way occasionally.

It's listed in PSUL (Passenger Services over Unusual Lines): YE07, Woodburn Junction–Tinsley North Junction.

 

[Dr Hoo]

I agree completely.
I'm planning on walking from Middlewood in the near future; that there's only a train every two hours is annoying but I can accommodate this in my plans. However I would never plan on walking to Middlewood because I'd not want to just miss a train and have to wait two hours for the next one.

I would hardly describe the walking around Middlewood as ‘difficult’. We’re not talking about being lost on the Kinder Plateau in thick fog without a map, compass or mobile phone.

There are plenty of straightforward walks to or from Middlewood, e.g. to Disley, Rose Hill Marple, Marple via the canal towpath, Poynton or even Romiley. All these have more frequent trains and opportunities for refreshment.

How many people randomly alight at Middlewood, wander around aimlessly in the vicinity for an indeterminate period and then rock up back at the same station only to find that they’ve just missed a train home?

 

[zwk500]

I would hardly describe the walking around Middlewood as ‘difficult’. We’re not talking about being lost on the Kinder Plateau in thick fog without a map, compass or mobile phone.

There are plenty of straightforward walks to or from Middlewood, e.g. to Disley, Rose Hill Marple, Marple via the canal towpath, Poynton or even Romiley. All these have more frequent trains and opportunities for refreshment.

How many people randomly alight at Middlewood, wander around aimlessly in the vicinity for an indeterminate period and then rock up back at the same station only to find that they’ve just missed a train home?

That's not quite what the post you were quoting is saying. He's talking about planning a walk from e.g. Edale over the hill and then taking a train from Middlewood back home. It would be quite easy to take longer than planned especially if with a group and miss a train.

 

[Dr Hoo]

That's not quite what the post you were quoting is saying. He's talking about planning a walk from e.g. Edale over the hill and then taking a train from Middlewood back home. It would be quite easy to take longer than planned especially if with a group and miss a train.

If you're walking 15 mies or so from Edale, fair enough. However, most plausible routes would provide the opportunity to divert or stop short at Disley, catch a bus on the A6 or whatever if you were 'running late'.

I'm still not convinced that this is a massive revenue disincentive insofar as easy workarounds also generate equivalent revenue at neighbouring stations.

 

[Starmill]

Although how much of that usage is down to people splitting at Middlewood due to being the boundary of Greater Manchester (similar to Strines & Glazebrook).

And of course Blackrod.

I think that it's also people who live in Greater Manchester who are eligible to post-0930 rail travel for £10 per year if they are of state pension age, or free with some disabilities. They can travel to stations on the Buxton line with tickets from Middlewood even if the train doesn't stop there.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Jan 2023 ==

That's not quite what the post you were quoting is saying. He's talking about planning a walk from e.g. Edale over the hill and then taking a train from Middlewood back home. It would be quite easy to take longer than planned especially if with a group and miss a train.

I think that, more to the point, the service is designed first and foremost to take people to Manchester city centre, or to long-distance trains at Stockport. Travel into Buxton itself both locally and for visitors nationally is a secondary objective. It's these priorities which drive the timetable rather than people who may once or twice a year want to go walking and find Middlewood station convenient to that.

 

[30907]

I really wonder how all those walkers who use the Settle-Carlisle and Bentham Lines manage with only 2-hourly services? (Answer, at least as far as the group I belong to is concerned, you end the walk somewhere with watering facilities....)

 

[zwk500]

If you're walking 15 mies or so from Edale, fair enough. However, most plausible routes would provide the opportunity to divert or stop short at Disley, catch a bus on the A6 or whatever if you were 'running late'.

I'm still not convinced that this is a massive revenue disincentive insofar as easy workarounds also generate equivalent revenue at neighbouring stations.

I think that it's also people who live in Greater Manchester who are eligible to post-0930 rail travel for £10 per year if they are of state pension age, or free with some disabilities. They can travel to stations on the Buxton line with tickets from Middlewood even if the train doesn't stop there.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Jan 2023 ==


I think that, more to the point, the service is designed first and foremost to take people to Manchester city centre, or to long-distance trains at Stockport. Travel into Buxton itself both locally and for visitors nationally is a secondary objective. It's these priorities which drive the timetable rather than people who may once or twice a year want to go walking and find Middlewood station convenient to that.

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that the Manchester-Buxton services should be designed around walkers, and completely agree that Manchester commuters should be considered before hillwalkers. I was just making the point that the suggestion was not a circular walk from a station where somebody got lost, but a cross-country walk utilising the train to get back to the origin point.

 

[mangyiscute]

I just don't get the attitude of "oh well the walkers can deal with a 1tp2h" when a much better service would be so easy to provide - that sort of attitude is what puts people off of the railways. Just because when you go for walks you do it in a certain way and would be happy to return via a different station doesn't mean everyone else will do it the same - I expect some people will plan their walks without checking the timetable, assuming its at least an hourly service, then if they get stuck with a 90 minute wait, next time, they'll just drive - a great way to put off new passengers

 

[zwk500]

I just don't get the attitude of "oh well the walkers can deal with a 1tp2h" when a much better service would be so easy to provide - that sort of attitude is what puts people off of the railways.

Presumably, if it was so easy they'd be providing it. Skipping out stations in an otherwise straightforward pattern is either done because it's operationally necessary or because of concerns of other passengers.

Just because when you go for walks you do it in a certain way and would be happy to return via a different station doesn't mean everyone else will do it the same - I expect some people will plan their walks without checking the timetable, assuming its at least an hourly service, then if they get stuck with a 90 minute wait, next time, they'll just drive - a great way to put off new passengers

As mentioned before, 1 passenger lost for 10 gained is a fair calculation for an industry running on public subsidy to make. Especially if the 10 passengers gained will pay more per ticket than the 1 lost would have.

I suspect Buxton-Manchester traffic is more sensitive to overall journey time, frequency and contributes more passengers (and more fare revenue per passenger) than hillwalkers. It is therefore fair to concentrate the railway service on Manchester-Buxton and treat any hillwalking custom as a bonus.

 

[mangyiscute]

Presumably, if it was so easy they'd be providing it. Skipping out stations in an otherwise straightforward pattern is either done because it's operationally necessary or because of concerns of other passengers.

As mentioned before, 1 passenger lost for 10 gained is a fair calculation for an industry running on public subsidy to make. Especially if the 10 passengers gained will pay more per ticket than the 1 lost would have.

I suspect Buxton-Manchester traffic is more sensitive to overall journey time, frequency and contributes more passengers (and more fare revenue per passenger) than hillwalkers. It is therefore fair to concentrate the railway service on Manchester-Buxton and treat any hillwalking custom as a bonus.

As I mentioned earlier, there are no clear operational reasons that these trains could not all stop at Middlewood (if there are, someone please enlighten me).

It would most likely add 2-3 minutes onto the journey to Buxton, which is currently at 1h1 for the trains that I looked at. I highly doubt a large number of passengers would see the journey time change to 1h4, and suddenly decide that the train takes too long and go for alternate means - if time is so essential on this line, why not remove the Levenshulme and Heaton Chapel stops on these trains too to get a sub hour journey length - perhaps then the number of passengers would double!

 

[geoffk]

Not all stations on the Whitby branch are served by all trains. Some are little-used but oddly the last train at 22.23 omits both Ruswarp and Sleights, achieving a one-minute saving in the Whitby - Grosmont timing. Both these villages have a half-hourly bus service from Whitby but the last one is at 18.16 so you would think there must be some demand in the evening.

 

[Llandudno]

Not all stations on the Whitby branch are served by all trains. Some are little-used but oddly the last train at 22.23 omits both Ruswarp and Sleights, achieving a one-minute saving in the Whitby - Grosmont timing. Both these villages have a half-hourly bus service from Whitby but the last one is at 18.16 so you would think there must be some demand in the evening.

Agreed that is bizarre, there is lots of holiday accommodation in Ruswarp and Sleights and you would have though that tourists would use the train to have an evening in Whitby

 

[zwk500]

Agreed that is bizarre, there is lots of holiday accommodation in Ruswarp and Sleights and you would have though that tourists would use the train to have an evening in Whitby

It's especially bizarre because Ruswarp requires Middlesbrough-bound trains to stop so the driver can activate the level crossing plunger. (Sleights has the same requirement for Whitby-bound trains).

 

[30907]

Not all stations on the Whitby branch are served by all trains. Some are little-used but oddly the last train at 22.23 omits both Ruswarp and Sleights, achieving a one-minute saving in the Whitby - Grosmont timing. Both these villages have a half-hourly bus service from Whitby but the last one is at 18.16 so you would think there must be some demand in the evening.

I note that pre-Covid the train also omitted Danby, so there must have been a request to add the stop.

 

[mangyiscute]

The only thing I can think of is some issue with station lighting and it not being safe in the dark or something along those lines?

 

[hexagon789]

The only thing I can think of is some issue with station lighting and it not being safe in the dark or something along those lines?

The inbound service which forms the 2223 calls at Ruswarp only 16.5 mins before returning to pass it.

 

[nw1]

There is a calculable cost (fuel, brake block wear, etc) for adding extra stops into a service, not forgetting the revenue adjustment for lengthening end to end journey times. If the marginal revenue gain from the stop is less than the cost, then the commercial case is against the stop being added.

That does seem to be rather an excessively bean-counting attitude though.

If it costs very marginally more to make both of the Dove Holes and Middlewood calls versus just one, that must be an absolutely tiny and inconsequential percentage increase in the total cost of running the Buxton line, surely.

I have a similar gripe about the lack of Beaulieu Road stops on every stopping train on Saturdays in particular.

The alternative explanation I have heard for these random gaps (which I have more sympathy for) is that if an hourly service is implemented, it's then more difficult to withdraw it if that becomes necessary. So, if the timeable changed so that the turnaround at Buxton is reduced to 7 minutes, then making both calls would incur a time penalty of 2 min per direction, and reduce the turnaround time to an unworkable 3 minutes, or a wasteful 1hr 3mins. So in such case there is a good reason for not stopping at both because it saves a unit.

 

[zwk500]

That does seem to be rather an excessively bean-counting attitude though.

Ah I see you've met the Treasury accountants and DfT service spec writers before!

 

[nw1]

Ah I see you've met the Treasury accountants and DfT service spec writers before!

I am certainly familiar with Mr Hunt and his general outlook on things.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

That does seem to be rather an excessively bean-counting attitude though.

If it costs very marginally more to make both of the Dove Holes and Middlewood calls versus just one, that must be an absolutely tiny and inconsequential percentage increase in the total cost of running the Buxton line, surely.

I have a similar gripe about the lack of Beaulieu Road stops on every stopping train on Saturdays in particular.

The alternative explanation I have heard for these random gaps (which I have more sympathy for) is that if an hourly service is implemented, it's then more difficult to withdraw it if that becomes necessary. So, if the timeable changed so that the turnaround at Buxton is reduced to 7 minutes, then making both calls would incur a time penalty of 2 min per direction, and reduce the turnaround time to an unworkable 3 minutes, or a wasteful 1hr 3mins. So in such case there is a good reason for not stopping at both because it saves a unit.

A commercial railway has to justify every change with a business case. If the case is non-commercial then it will only happen if the DfT specifies it, as they ultimately hold the purse strings and must approve the cost, however small.

(Not expressing my opinion either way, just that it’s the reality.)

 

[nw1]

A commercial railway has to justify every change with a business case. If the case is non-commercial then it will only happen if the DfT specifies it, as they ultimately hold the purse strings and must approve the cost, however small.

(Not expressing my opinion either way, just that it’s the reality.)

Sad though, and excessively bureaucratic and counter to common-sense. A bit like complaining about the price of a product going up from £10.00 to £10.01, I suspect. It's the percentage increase that surely matters, and if the percentage is inconsequential but you're benefitting even a small number of passengers, then it should happen. Certainly in the summer and early autumn Beaulieu Road (similar to Dove Holes and Middlewood in this respect) typically has a few passengers boarding and alighting on the hourly services on a Sunday, suggesting an hourly service on Saturday would also be used similarly - and, for timetable simplification, you may as well make the stop hourly 7 days a week.

Was BR run in a similarly restrictive fashion? Let's say hypothetically Middlewood and Dove Holes had a two-hourly service in 1983, and an hourly service could be introduced without causing pathing problems, requiring an extra unit, or a short turnaround at Buxton. Let's say a new division manager decided to introduce this, to benefit a small number of passengers, using the principle of "if even a very small number benefit for no discernible cost, it's a good thing". Would it have been such a difficult process then, or could the division just have made all trains call at both stations without resistance?

As I said above though, I do have some sympathy for the "introducing a service makes it harder to withdraw later if needs dictate" argument though.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Jan 2023 ==

As I mentioned earlier, there are no clear operational reasons that these trains could not all stop at Middlewood (if there are, someone please enlighten me).

It would most likely add 2-3 minutes onto the journey to Buxton, which is currently at 1h1 for the trains that I looked at.

Probably not even that, given the steep (by railway standards) and twisting nature of the line. I'd suspect about 1.5 mins either way, if that. (For example, the 80s timings for the Haslemere-Guildford section on the Portsmouth Direct were 13 mins non-stop Haslemere to Guildford versus 19 mins for all 4 stations, and the Direct, while somewhat hilly, is less so than Buxton).

Put it this way, I very much doubt anyone from Buxton wishing to travel into Manchester will suddenly be put off by one additional stop at Middlewood when the train is already all other stations to Stockport. (They might on the other hand be encouraged by a second, semi-fast, train in each hour calling at only 3 or 4 stops between Buxton and Stockport, which would provide a real, non-minuscule speed-up.... but I guess such things are a pipe dream for now!)

 

[Dr Hoo]

That does seem to be rather an excessively bean-counting attitude though.

If it costs very marginally more to make both of the Dove Holes and Middlewood calls versus just one, that must be an absolutely tiny and inconsequential percentage increase in the total cost of running the Buxton line, surely.

I have a similar gripe about the lack of Beaulieu Road stops on every stopping train on Saturdays in particular.

The alternative explanation I have heard for these random gaps (which I have more sympathy for) is that if an hourly service is implemented, it's then more difficult to withdraw it if that becomes necessary. So, if the timeable changed so that the turnaround at Buxton is reduced to 7 minutes, then making both calls would incur a time penalty of 2 min per direction, and reduce the turnaround time to an unworkable 3 minutes, or a wasteful 1hr 3mins. So in such case there is a good reason for not stopping at both because it saves a unit.

This is nothing new (and long precedes privatisation, franchising, DfT 'micromanagement' or whatever).

Near the start of my railway career, on the erstwhile London Division of the London Midland Region, alleged prospective passengers asked for all trains out of Marylebone to/via High Wycombe to call at Seer Green and/or Saunderton or Kings Sutton. In those leisurely and uncongested times there was no real capacity argument. It was all down to the fuel, brake blocks and 'tedium' reasons.

 

[156421]

Here's another inexplicable one:

2C51 10:13 departure Lancaster to Carlisle (via Barrow in Furness) (Mon-Sat) calls at all stations on the route, including request stops (except Nethertown and Braystones which isn't a surprise as most services don't call there), however it then skips Harrington (which is not a request stop), Flimby (request stop), and Dalston (not a request stop) for no reason.

 

[nw1]

The one I never got to the bottom of is for the opposite reason - random extra stops.

Back in around 2002-2004, or so, one service from Victoria to Southampton Central via Hove (calling Cosham around 2120) would call additionally at Portchester and Woolston, possibly Netley also, when no other off-peak services did. This would have been in the last years of the CIGs, but I can't remember whether it was Connex or Southern by then. It was the "classic" timetable though, with 1tph to Southampton Central via Hove with a standard calling pattern of Cosham-Fareham-Swanwick only.

Not sure if anyone can shed a light on this. It wasn't to cover a missing SWT service, as one followed around 20 minutes later in the standard hourly path. Maybe this topic (random extra stops in the hourly pattern at off-peak times) needs its own thread!

 

[Mcr Warrior]

The one I never got to the bottom of is for the opposite reason - random extra stops.

Would it be fair to suggest that the occurrence of "random extra stops" more often than not affects 'start of day' or 'end of day' train services?

Maybe this topic (random extra stops in the hourly pattern at off-peak times) needs its own thread!

Very possibly! One for the forum mods to opine upon!