Typical lack of thinking - late night connections

[DarloRich]

Dr Spock was the American child care guy

I know - i did it on purpose!

 

[Mcr Warrior]

I know - i did it on purpose!

Of course you did!

 

[Krokodil]

Nobody seems to have written anything about "think of the passengers". Didn't anyone in the industry nowadays ever read of such concepts in Thomas the Tank Engine? If I recall the stories correctly, it used to be the Driver who would remind the Engines about this approach. How times change.

Now that Thomas has been sold off to an American multinational conglomerate, I don't think that he thinks of the passengers any more either.

Remember that Lumo is viewed by the powers that be as the future of rail (not a network, you can forget that). Forget looking at the likes of SBB as illustrations of how properly-funded and organised railway networks function, the government would rather use the Ryanair model.

 

[Taunton]

I think we have to get away from what I honestly view as just excuses, I have commented here before about the Waterloo to Reading service regularly arriving at Ascot 10 minutes late, and passengers having the doors of the connection shut in their face, and straight away comes back that we don't want to delay the passengers already on board - notwithstanding that nobody really boards the Camberley train at Ascot, and if the connection is missed it leaves as effectively empty stock. Ah, but we then have to think about those further down the line - well, it always has a 5 minute dwell at Frimley. Ah, but ... and on it goes.

And why is the main train so regularly held up by 10 minutes in the first place. That seems allowed. But not the connection.

 

[Busaholic]

I think we have to get away from what I honestly view as just excuses, I have commented here before about the Waterloo to Reading service regularly arriving at Ascot 10 minutes late, and passengers having the doors of the connection shut in their face, and straight away comes back that we don't want to delay the passengers already on board - notwithstanding that nobody really boards the Camberley train at Ascot, and if the connection is missed it leaves as effectively empty stock. Ah, but we then have to think about those further down the line - well, it always has a 5 minute dwell at Frimley. Ah, but ... and on it goes.

And why is the main train so regularly held up by 10 minutes in the first place. That seems allowed. But not the connection.

If I were a passenger on the train that closed its doors, and saw what happened to those left standing on the platform, I'd be outraged on their behalf and I'm sure most other passengers wouldn't object to lengthening their journey by a couple of minutes in the circs. Most people aren't as selfish as some on this forum!

 

[Krokodil]

I think we have to get away from what I honestly view as just excuses, I have commented here before about the Waterloo to Reading service regularly arriving at Ascot 10 minutes late, and passengers having the doors of the connection shut in their face, and straight away comes back that we don't want to delay the passengers already on board - notwithstanding that nobody really boards the Camberley train at Ascot, and if the connection is missed it leaves as effectively empty stock. Ah, but we then have to think about those further down the line - well, it always has a 5 minute dwell at Frimley. Ah, but ... and on it goes.

And why is the main train so regularly held up by 10 minutes in the first place. That seems allowed. But not the connection.

It's not excuses, staff are doing what the government wants them to do. Right down to the delay minute merry-go-round that penalises holding connections.

If we are to have an integrated transport network, the government has to want it. They also need to plan it and fund it.

 

[FlybeDash8Q400]

Most people aren't as selfish as some on this forum!

It’s not being selfish. It’s simply stating what the current rules are. In the current set up it is simply unachievable. The railway whether people like it or not is now performance based, so everything will fall back to that.

Suggestions on paper may look easy to implement, but there’s more to it than meets the eye.

 

[Dr Hoo]

It's not excuses, staff are doing what the government wants them to do. Right down to the delay minute merry-go-round that penalises holding connections.

If we are to have an integrated transport network, the government has to want it. They also need to plan it and fund it.

Exactly. I have always thought that this sprang from John Prescott's speech to his party's conference in October 1999.

"The performance of our privatised railways is, by common consent, a national disgrace, with service reductions, failing performance and increased fares."

To gain a greater focus on performance the Office of Passenger Rail Franchising was abolished and replaced with the Strategic Rail Authority (subsequently abolished, with the DfT taking direct control).

Having attended meetings with ministers from various administrations I can personally testify that railway performance has remained a high priority for governments ever since.

 

[zwk500]

Reckon that quote is attributed to the fictional character Mr Spock, first portrayed by the actor Leonard Nimoy.

Wrath of Khan, IIRC. Although the actual quote starts with 'Logic clearly dictates', so going by normal railway attitude to things logical, that maxim would be in the bin sharpish...

 

[driverd]

For all these:

The question is - which passengers? The trainload on the KGX-EDB who are already 23 late, or the the rather smaller number on the TPE.

They clearly did think of the passengers in this situation regarding Lumo, not delaying and overcrowding a likely full train heading to Edinburgh or delaying all these people for a small number of people off a regional service.

Sort of, would you delay 200 passengers for say 15 mins, so that 20 could join that train, thereby risking either further delayed trains at another connecting point, thereby making even more passengers late, or break the connection at the other end, making maybe 50 / 100 miss a connection, and so it goes on.....

But they have - The issue is they havent done so in a manner you approve of! As Dr Spock would say: The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few!

No one has actually addressed:

Now the other interesting thing is that a northbound Lumo (also First) passes through York station 14 minutes after we arrive. Obviously this isn't currently scheduled to stop at York, nor any intermediate points before Newcastle - but would it be really impossible to call these at the relevant places given that they've got somewhere near 10 minutes performance/pathing allowance (not to mention over 10 mins engineering allowance, and the fact that it's running a few minutes early) before Edinburgh?

Would save these passengers (of which there are probably 20-30) a good 55 minutes, and really be helpful to the customer where the railway seems to lack any interest in their existence at times.

Summarised nice and succinctly by:

There's the usual litany of excuses above for why such helpful things can't be done, and if we wait a bit longer I'm sure others will be able to think of some more.

Taking a look at the real life performance, the Lumo service that evening passed York -2, meaning it could readily have stopped, collected passengers and departed RT.

The train ended up delayed anyway due to following the late running 1S32 (but despite being +3 at Newcastle was still -6 at Edinburgh). Quite clearly evidencing that to add a stop at York, depositing customers at Newcastle, would have added zero time to the Lumo service (I will however concede that to call at any other stops would be somewhat more contentious).

Practically, yes, this is a tad challenging as it would require agreement between various control offices etc - but in an ideal world this really shouldn't be rocket science.

As people who know the industry, its often easy to avail ourselves of the usual excuses. In reality it's often the case that a more critical eye should be cast on decisions if we want to see the industry seek to serve its user better.

 

[Dr Hoo]

The train ended up delayed anyway due to following the late running 1S32 (but despite being +3 at Newcastle was still -6 at Edinburgh). Quite clearly evidencing that to add a stop at York, depositing customers at Newcastle, would have added zero time to the Lumo service (I will however concede that to call at any other stops would be somewhat more contentious).

I thought that the proposition was that Lumo might call additionally at York and Northallerton and Darlington and Durham. This would be more like a 15-minute extension of journey time even with a clear path.

Especially at night, north of Newcastle, this would have a serious risk of squeezing overnight possessions (it's the last train through), exceeding Lumo's driver hours/overnight rest and so on.

 

[DarloRich]

No one has actually addressed:

It is possible Lumo were asked and said no on the basis of one or more of the following points: of an already full train, unacceptable delays, possessions, driver knowledge, hours, phases of the moon and swamp gas reflecting of Venus. It is also possible no one asked. We will never know.

It is also possible for the people running the show to HAVE thought of the passengers and decided that the interests of 100's on the Lumo train were more important than the lower number of passengers on the TPE train. Like I said, they thought about the passengers and decided on a result outside of the RUK approved outcomes book!

It is, of course, the default setting of this board to see a conspiracy where there isn't one!

PS I am sure on 1953/63/73/83 it was easier to stop a train and make arrangements on the fly. The fragmentated railway of 2023 doesn't easily deliver that. Sadly, we don't live in an ideal world.

 

[Horizon22]

I think we have to get away from what I honestly view as just excuses, I have commented here before about the Waterloo to Reading service regularly arriving at Ascot 10 minutes late, and passengers having the doors of the connection shut in their face, and straight away comes back that we don't want to delay the passengers already on board - notwithstanding that nobody really boards the Camberley train at Ascot, and if the connection is missed it leaves as effectively empty stock. Ah, but we then have to think about those further down the line - well, it always has a 5 minute dwell at Frimley. Ah, but ... and on it goes.

And why is the main train so regularly held up by 10 minutes in the first place. That seems allowed. But not the connection.

It's more about proactivity and awareness. Does the inward guard know the connections? Does the outward guard? Does the station staff? Is anyone going to ask to hold the train? What is control's role? Will it be authorised? Does if make up time (it does). I don't think there's a lack of desire to know, but people need full knowledge to make the right decision and most of the time everyone only has a bit, or other tasks to do.

In such scenarios, as above, TOCs need better connectivity policies where it just makes sense. Some TOCs have done this (GWR are good). why others have not it is unknown, especially within their own TOCs.

The additional complication is the fragmented nature and TOCs looking out for themselves which you can understand but is it passenger friendly? Not so much.

 

[pompeyfan]

I’ve been on a GWR service approaching Exeter St David’s before where the guard has come over the PA saying along the lines of “I did ask for the SWR train to be held, but they refused”. You only have to pull up RTT most days for a station like Honiton to see why SWR declined.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I’ve been on a GWR service approaching Exeter St David’s before where the guard has come over the PA saying along the lines of “I did ask for the SWR train to be held, but they refused”. You only have to pull up RTT most days for a station like Honiton to see why SWR declined.

Although it’s very annoying for passengers if the down train is late and the up simply leaves Exeter right time and waits 10 minutes at Pinhoe for the single line…

 

[Taunton]

It's more about proactivity and awareness. Does the inward guard know the connections? Does the outward guard? Does the station staff? Is anyone going to ask to hold the train? What is control's role? Will it be authorised? Does if make up time (it does).

I honestly cannot see how the guard (or control) on Ascot to Aldershot doesn't understand about the connections ... and it's all in the same TOC (after all, in BR times it used to be a through service which divided here, so the issue didn't arise).

I do understand that if the "targets" and reports had included connecting passengers delayed, and quantified those, it would be treated a whole lot differently.

 

[Horizon22]

I honestly cannot see how the guard (or control) on Ascot to Aldershot doesn't understand about the connections ... and it's all in the same TOC (after all, in BR times it used to be a through service which divided here, so the issue didn't arise).

I do understand that if the "targets" and reports had included connecting passengers delayed, and quantified those, it would be treated a whole lot differently.

Control aren't looking at every single train and understanding every potential consequence due to every delay, always. More they might need to be aware of the delay and upcoming issue it might cause. And then authorise a hold. All made better by an actual connectional policy. I agree guards should generally know.

 

[Bald Rick]

Remember that Lumo is viewed by the powers that be as the future of rail

Not sure which powers that be you speak to, but the ones I speak to have a very different opinion.

 

[ainsworth74]

No one has actually addressed:

Why is it in Lumo's interest to delay their passengers to help TPE?

 

[Bevan Price]

9M21 now shown about 40 late at Leeds.....
Hope they don't terminate that at York..

Train history from RTT.
9M21 eventually left York 42 late, but gained 23 mins on an easy schedule to arrive 19 late at Newcastle.

 

[FlybeDash8Q400]

Train history from RTT.
9M21 eventually left York 42 late, but gained 23 mins on an easy schedule to arrive 19 late at Newcastle.

Must be one of those schedules with large engineering allowances. Quite a number of late evening ECML services have this.

 

[Krokodil]

Not sure which powers that be you speak to, but the ones I speak to have a very different opinion.

Isn't it the logical culmination of the plans set in motion by the Major government? Plenty on the Tory benches must be wetting themselves over Lumo.

 

[The Planner]

Must be one of those schedules with large engineering allowances. Quite a number of late evening ECML services have this.

Single Line Working allowances I assume, and it must have run fast line instead of slow between Tollerton and Thirsk.

 

[ainsworth74]

Isn't it the logical culmination of the plans set in motion by the Major government? Plenty on the Tory benches must be wetting themselves over Lumo.

Perhaps on Tory benches but the recieved wisdom is the DfT hate open access as they see it as taking away revenue from their operators. I seem to recall there was vieled threat made to the ORR during deliberations on the open access on the ECML back in 2017(ish, I think) that if the ORR granted more access rights to OAOs that they DfT might have to "reconsider" some of the investment being planned as part of the IEP project as it might not be value for money any more.

 

[Bald Rick]

Isn't it the logical culmination of the plans set in motion by the Major government? Plenty on the Tory benches must be wetting themselves over Lumo.

An awful lot has changed in the intervening 31 years….

 

[Horizon22]

Isn't it the logical culmination of the plans set in motion by the Major government? Plenty on the Tory benches must be wetting themselves over Lumo.

More they've (First) seen a niche, taken a punt and it's worked?

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Why is it in Lumo's interest to delay their passengers to help TPE?

Interestingly, Lumo control, Hull Control and TPE North route control is the same desk at Ashburys ROC....

Must be one of those schedules with large engineering allowances. Quite a number of late evening ECML services have this.

Single Line Working allowances I assume, and it must have run fast line instead of slow between Tollerton and Thirsk.

1N34 and 9E21 are both booked slow lines north of York and have engineering allowances for any bi-directional operation north of Northallerton. Interestingly 9E21 often waits time at Chester-le-street which causes a delay to 1N34 right behind it!

 

[Krokodil]

An awful lot has changed in the intervening 31 years….

And some things have come full circle.

 

[WAB]

I honestly cannot see how the guard (or control) on Ascot to Aldershot doesn't understand about the connections ... and it's all in the same TOC (after all, in BR times it used to be a through service which divided here, so the issue didn't arise).

I do understand that if the "targets" and reports had included connecting passengers delayed, and quantified those, it would be treated a whole lot differently.

Having briefly worked in a TOC control, it is amazing just how difficult it is to keep a handle on what the impact of your decisions is - each train is just one row of a very long table, and it's very easy to end up firefighting when multiple things are going wrong rather than organising connections. I suppose it would take local initiative (assuming there's actually the station staff to organise it/guards willing to take the time) or a certain amount of time trains can be held for late-running connections without reference to a higher authority. Or perhaps they could have an additional post in TOC controls responsible for monitoring the impact on passengers and intervening if needed.

 

[Bald Rick]

And some things have come full circle.

Not this though.