• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Reduction in train frequency when part of the line is closed

Status
Not open for further replies.

miklcct

Established Member
Joined
2 May 2021
Messages
5,017
Location
Cricklewood
I have found out that, sometimes when a certain stretch of railway line is closed, the service frequency on the still-open part of the line gets reduced.

For example, if the line between Royston and Cambridge is closed on a Saturday, the typical service remaining between London and Royston (for a rail replacement bus to Cambridge) on the East Coast Main Line will become hourly on each of Kings Cross - Royston non-stop, Brighton - Royston (fast between Finsbury Park and Stevenage), and Kings Cross - Royston stopping, where the normal service frequency is half-hourly on each of the above.

This is a massive service degradation on top of the bustitution, and stations which haven't been affected by the closure become victims as well, for example, Welwyn North which normally has a half-hourly service, having only one train per hour despite the line isn't closed.

I wonder why train companies are let off on such service reduction? How is the lost capacity replaced? Won't the remaining train services become overcrowded?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Class 170101

On Moderation
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
8,664
Sometimes it will be resourcing that means the reduction has to happen, in this case Cambridge provides a lot of trains for service as well as a lot of train crew.

Sometimes it will be ther limitations of the remaining open infrastructure that will dictate the service pattern. In this case Royston Station has only two bi-directional platforms, this limits the number of trains that can reliably terminate and start here.
 

Kite159

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
22,859
Location
West of Andover
I was expecting this to be about London Overground on the North London Line dropping to 4tph rather than 8tph whenever the line towards Richmond or Clapham is closed beyond Willesden causing a bit of overcrowding on the section remaining open.

But regarding Royston, it's only 2 platforms rather than the multiple platforms at Cambridge, so there is less space. Although why Great Northern/Thameslink don't put extra stops at the likes of Welwyn North & Knebworth isn't ideal
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
23,403
I wonder why train companies are let off on such service reduction?
Who is there to 'let them off'? Sometimes, fewer people will travel when there is engineering work, so the service provision doesn't need to be maintained. For example, in the Royston example, if the line into Liverpool Street is still available, Cambridge passengers will go that way.
 

Kite159

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
22,859
Location
West of Andover
Who is there to 'let them off'? Sometimes, fewer people will travel when there is engineering work, so the service provision doesn't need to be maintained. For example, in the Royston example, if the line into Liverpool Street is still available, Cambridge passengers will go that way.
Unless the line into Liverpool Street is also closed due to the remodelling works around the Cambridge South station site.

(Also reminds me of a weekend in Jan 2020 when the Warrington Central line was closed with Northern running replacement buses all the way from Lime Street rather than South Parkway as the section between South Parkway & Lime Street was open as usual)
 

Magdalia

Established Member
Joined
1 Jan 2022
Messages
7,434
Location
The Fens
For example, if the line between Royston and Cambridge is closed on a Saturday, the typical service remaining between London and Royston (for a rail replacement bus to Cambridge) on the East Coast Main Line will become hourly on each of Kings Cross - Royston non-stop, Brighton - Royston (fast between Finsbury Park and Stevenage), and Kings Cross - Royston stopping, where the normal service frequency is half-hourly on each of the above.
There is very long experience of doing train/bus interchange at Royston, going back to when Royston-Cambridge was electrified in the 1980s.

But regarding Royston, it's only 2 platforms rather than the multiple platforms at Cambridge

In this case Royston Station has only two bi-directional platforms, this limits the number of trains that can reliably terminate and start here.


Royston does have two platforms signalled for reversing trains, dating back to when electric trains terminated there 1978-88. But when the signalling was installed current rules on overlaps did not apply. Now, if an up train is departing from platform 2, down trains have to wait at Litlington, more than a mile away, making for long reoccupation times.

The platforms at Royston are narrow, especially under the Old North Road bridge, which is part way along both platforms. This means that long dwell times are also needed, especially bearing in mind that boarding passengers are in crowds of 50 coming off buses not a steady trickle.

Furthermore, the buses can only arrive/depart on the down side car park, the road access on the up side is narrow, twisty and hilly, thus not suitable for buses.

And currently there is a further complication: Royston has no footbridge. The footbridge installed before electrification has been closed for a while, having been declared unsafe, and the new footbridge, which will give Royston lifts for the first time, is not complete yet. So passengers arriving or departing from platform 1 have to use the Old North Road bridge to get from and to the buses in the down side car park.

In all of the last 30 or more years, I can't remember Royston ever reversing more than 4tph during engineering work, there simply isn't the capacity. Before Thameslink, when there were only 4tph anyway, and 3tph on Sundays, that wasn't a problem. But since Thameslink started in 2018 it has been impossible to run the full service when trains are terminating at Royston.

Despite these drawbacks, Royston is still the best place to do the train/bus interchange, because it is the only station on the branch with a big enough car park to handle the buses.

Sometimes it will be resourcing that means the reduction has to happen, in this case Cambridge provides a lot of trains for service as well as a lot of train crew.
This is a further complication since Thameslink started, in the old days a lot of the trains running in and out of Royston during engineering work would have been crewed by Kings Cross and Hitchin drivers, and I'm guessing that doesn't happen now.

Although why Great Northern/Thameslink don't put extra stops at the likes of Welwyn North & Knebworth isn't ideal
There is a simple answer to that, which is that the ECML timetable is a very delicate flower, especially getting trains through the 2 track section at Welwyn. During engineering work, the trains still have to follow their booked paths on the ECML so that they don't disrupt other services. There are few better ways of wrecking the ECML timetable than out of course stops at Welwyn North!

Who is there to 'let them off'? Sometimes, fewer people will travel when there is engineering work, so the service provision doesn't need to be maintained. For example, in the Royston example, if the line into Liverpool Street is still available, Cambridge passengers will go that way.

Unless the line into Liverpool Street is also closed due to the remodelling works around the Cambridge South station site.
There will be lots of blocks of both routes between now and when Cambridge South opens in 2025, including no trains between Christmas Eve 2023 and 2 January 2024.
 

richa2002

Established Member
Joined
8 Jun 2005
Messages
2,298
There's no reason Letchworth couldn't be used to fill the gap in the stoppers.
 

Magdalia

Established Member
Joined
1 Jan 2022
Messages
7,434
Location
The Fens
There's no reason Letchworth couldn't be used to fill the gap in the stoppers.
I suspect that this is where the train crew constraint comes into play, especially now that the stoppers are interworked with the Fen Line fast trains at Kings Cross. What I don't know is how many stoppers are worked by Cambridge and Kings Lynn drivers, who are wrong side of the block.
 

Wilts Wanderer

Established Member
Joined
21 Nov 2016
Messages
3,199
The reality of temporary timetables / diagrams is that they are less efficient all round, particularly with traincrew diagrams which may have extra shunting moves and sub-optimal layovers etc. Each TOC has to assess what it can reliably operate with the resources available - you can’t just issue an extra 10-20 diagrams to a depot and expect them to be covered without issues somewhere. A tactical ‘thinning’ is sensible if it prevents a bunch of uncovered diagrams and loads of cancellations / delays on the day.
 

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
19,904
Location
East Anglia
An odd one that was discovered recently at Cambridge was that in layover time Norwich drivers were rostered to do a Cambridge North shuttle. Turned out an off roster payment was due to every driver as this was Cambridge depot work with many claiming it from previous weeks once word got out. Needless to say train planning have not continued this practice since :lol:
 

Horizon22

Established Member
Associate Staff
Jobs & Careers
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
11,035
Location
London
I wonder why train companies are let off on such service reduction? How is the lost capacity replaced? Won't the remaining train services become overcrowded?

Because the capacity is probably severely reduced, so they are not "left off"; services are worked with what is available and what the expected demand will be (which can be altered depending on advance messaging). Planning teams will work on this months in advance and the resultant engineering works may lead to reduced platform availability at the temporary terminus, reduced/no depot access, an impact on travel time etc. Then there's any impact of adding trains into a engineering timetable that might impact other operators and looking at any other engineering works which impact the route.

Capacity is solved by either a) running replacement transport b) seeking ticket acceptance or c) advance warning to reduce the number of travellers.
 

Class 170101

On Moderation
Joined
1 Mar 2014
Messages
8,664
An odd one that was discovered recently at Cambridge was that in layover time Norwich drivers were rostered to do a Cambridge North shuttle. Turned out an off roster payment was due to every driver as this was Cambridge depot work with many claiming it from previous weeks once word got out. Needless to say train planning have not continued this practice since :lol:
No wonder the government wants to cut costs, just drive the train instead of spending hours arguing who's train it is!
 

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
19,904
Location
East Anglia
No wonder the government wants to cut costs, just drive the train instead of spending hours arguing who's train it is!

Doesn’t work like that. Was no argument. Agreements just have to be adhered to on both sides 8-)
 

306024

Established Member
Joined
23 Jan 2013
Messages
3,974
Location
East Anglia
No wonder the government wants to cut costs, just drive the train instead of spending hours arguing who's train it is!

The history is that GA still operate with three different drivers agreements from the merger of Anglia Railways, First Great Eastern and the West Anglia bit of WA&GN, back in 2004. Twenty years later and no one has successfully come up with a formula acceptable to all to have common conditions. Each area seems to prefer what they have.

So however daft you may think this is, if you’ve got an agreement the easiest way to start a dispute is to ignore it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top