are speed limits treated as targets

[Mawkie]

This is a fascinating thread - especially as an LU driver. Speaking of which...

LU is terrible for this in terms of people doing all manner of things, often without a good understanding of how the signalling actually works in a given location. So you can have signal engineers put a lot of work into designing things in such a way as to meet the required level of capacity, and drivers then essentially driving a coach and horses through what has been carefully designed. The Piccadilly Line is now terrible for this.

As a train op of a certain dark blue line, I was interested by your comment. I often wonder if passengers prefer me to run as close as possible behind the train in front (likely stopping in tunnels on red lights), or wait in platforms for the train ahead to gain some distance (potentially delaying trains behind me).

I don't want to derail the thread, but perhaps you had something else in mind when you suggested train ops had little understanding of the signalling system (something I am perhaps inclined to agree with). Have you got any examples?

 

[Starmill]

It’s possible to stop smoothly without losing time. Even on the ultimate metro which is LU, a top-class driver will throw the handle into off & release a second or two before the final stop, which makes it imperceptible. Likewise with braking it isn’t about how heavily the train brakes, but keeping a constant rate from start to finish, and avoiding sudden changes in brake rate.

In my experience LNER drivers are often notably good at this.

(I should add that I’m not saying others aren’t, just that I tend to use LNER more so it’s something I’ve noticed).

Absolutely, there is some incredible skill on display in the secondary things like ride smoothness. If only more road vehicle drivers could incorporate those principles into their driving.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Oct 2024 ==

Popular in the mess room then? Do you drive?

There is no reward for arriving early, or even on time.

There is usually tea and busicuits for making an error.

You might dislike the current culture. The current culture would likely have meant people would still be walking around alive today that are not.

I think BaldRick is commenting from the performance perspective rather than the driver standards one.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Oct 2024 ==

This is a fascinating thread - especially as an LU driver. Speaking of which...

As a train op of a certain dark blue line, I was interested by your comment. I often wonder if passengers prefer me to run as close as possible behind the train in front (likely stopping in tunnels on red lights), or wait in platforms for the train ahead to gain some distance (potentially delaying trains behind me).

I don't want to derail the thread, but perhaps you had something else in mind when you suggested train ops had little understanding of the signalling system (something I am perhaps inclined to agree with). Have you got any examples?

Passengers on LU frequently seem to be of the mindset that stopping outside of a platform is "bad" no matter how short the stop (even 15 seconds sometimes) and no matter if they actually get to their destination any quicker or no. I wonder if it's a psychology driven thing i.e. mainline trains only rarely come to a stop inside a tunnel but not at a station call. Or just because it's a shorter journey and there is an expectation nowadays of very close headway.

 

[Donny Dave]

I've noticed that TPE drivers tend to drive about 5-10mph under the limit heading to Sheffield from Doncaster. Their aim is get the signal at Swinton stepping up to green as they approach it, as they know then that the preceeding stopper has cleared Aldwarke junction.

 

[The Planner]

Presumably though you can have slack if, for example, the journey is timed for 75 mph traction, but in practice the stock & line are 100 mph? Or for that matter as an example the timings are for something like a class 317, but the actual stock is something more powerful like a 387?

Yes, but that wouldnt be intended apart from my example before. You just end up waiting time at the next station.

 

[Trains1]

It varies a fair amount but the absolute maximums are:

110 PS - Permissible Speed, the ordinary base limit
115 MU - Multiple Unit, certain classes of MU may run at this speed
125 EPS - Enhanced Permissible Speed, these are the 'tilt' speeds which Class 390 Pendolinos (and tilt-enabled 221s) can travel at.

Macclesfield and Stoke-on-Trent?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Oct 2024 ==

In https://sacuksprodnrdigital0001.blob.core.windows.net/sectional-appendix/Sectional Appendix full PDFs September 24/London North Western (North) Sectional Appendix September 2024.pdf if so

Thank you

 

[muz379]

For example, when Liverpool-Manchester was electrified, the services remained timed as DMUs for quite a long time after.

They were running a mix of DMU's and EMU's on the stoppers or quite a whilst though as well from what I remember , probably makes sense to time them for the slowest eventuality so it doesnt cause an issue if you have to do unit swaps .

 

[Sly Old Fox]

If that driver was losing time and delaying their train they would be required to fill out a delay slip or similar. 'Being more cautious' would most likely not be accepted as a valid reason for losing time.

No but saying you’re following the ‘professional driver’s policy’ would probably get you a DI job

 

[Harpo]

I have examples like that were a train that lost 7 minutes on a busy metro railway (not Thameslink) - called it in, tapes were pulled, and I was told by management it was being driven to an exemplary standard. I invited the mangaer concerned to opine on his view of a) what a high perfromjng railway looked like, and b) the driving standard of the vast majority of other drivers who keep to time on the same section, and how that compared to ‘exemplary’

I'd not like to be in a driver's shoes these days. Two real examples:

A) Only one driver kept to time (2mins box time) over a TSR. After OTMR review he was deemed wrong for accelerating then braking between the TSR and a PSR one mile later. TOC says he should have coasted!
B) Late night fast train timed slow lines with lots of circle time. Driver runs gently to all driving policies including ECO driving leaving several greens ahead, arriving to time at first call but gets 'tea no biscuits' because of a TRUST delay to a following service.

My natural cyncism makes me point out that driver A's delay went to NR and driver B's to the TOC!

 

[43066]

To be fair, most TL drivers are superb, in my opinion. Especially the one who takes over half the trains through the core

I completely missed this joke - can you explain?

Oh I wasn’t suggesting that in general, although I do know of some drivers who have been advised of the usual braking points for stations having been observed braking far too early.

But I think a driver driving with a sawtooth profile, never getting above 80 on a unit than can do 100 with clear signals, no TSRs, already running late and losing a load more time and delaying other trains does need a conversation to see whats going on.

Well, maybe. They won’t be going above 90 on the slows, so I assume you were on the fasts? I know they have a “passenger comfort” policy ir not taking full power below 10mph(?), but it seems a little odd that a driver would choose to drive 20 under the line speed, as it will only lead to more time in the chair, shorter breaks, a later finish etc.

I realise you know your onions, but are you absolutely sure there wasn’t a TSR, a unit with motors out etc.?

It’s possible to stop smoothly without losing time. Even on the ultimate metro which is LU, a top-class driver will throw the handle into off & release a second or two before the final stop, which makes it imperceptible. Likewise with braking it isn’t about how heavily the train brakes, but keeping a constant rate from start to finish, and avoiding sudden changes in brake rate.

In my experience LNER drivers are often notably good at this.

(I should add that I’m not saying others aren’t, just that I tend to use LNER more so it’s something I’ve noticed).

Something I always attempt to do. If I stop with a jerk, that’s a fail.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Oct 2024 ==

I don't want to derail the thread, but perhaps you had something else in mind when you suggested train ops had little understanding of the signalling system (something I am perhaps inclined to agree with). Have you got any examples?

Also interested to hear about this. It’s interesting that you agree that train ops don’t understand the signalling properly. I suppose on the mainline there are some who don’t understand approach control, as I alluded to earlier, which is also worrying - so perhaps there’s a parallel there? Or are you referring to something different?

It has been discussed before that the train stop/trip cock system means that SPADs weren’t historically treated as seriously on the underground as on the mainline.

 

[Deepgreen]

Timetables are generally built around line speeds and the various limits along the route. Thus, drivers will normally be expected to run at line speed in order to maintain those timetables. I can't think of any examples of services which require drivers to run below posted line speeds OR stock speed limits in order to maintain their timetabled progress. However, drivers have the freedom to run more slowly if their knowledge and experience tells them that doing so will not compromise the timetable.

 

[Trains1]

They used to do it that way in France! The so-called "coal payment" (prime charbon). Of course not something I've ever heard of as being a norm in Great Britain.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 4 Oct 2024 ==


It's probably more the case that the SRTs in certain areas are unsuitable, but which nobody has the resources to correct for such a small gain? Changes to differential speed limits, raised max permissible speeds, changes to traction types, different modes of electro-diesels, loco hauled with loads that are known to be slightly wrong, lots of this stuff seems to have cropped up in the past few years and understandably not really a priority to fix tiny things when they sort of work.

does not look like they have updated them for MAN-CRE Via SPT Northern between the 323 and 331 but I would have thought that the 331 could knock a bit off

 

[Starmill]

does not look like they have updated them for MAN-CRE Via SPT Northern between the 323 and 331 but I would have thought that the 331 could knock a bit off

They didn't update the DMU Sprinter timings for class 319s for almost five years. The Newquay line HSTs were timed at the previous lower speed for about 20 years!

 

[Egg Centric]

I completely missed this joke - can you explain?

Not to speak on behalf of Bald Rick, but speaking on behalf of Bald Rick, ATO

 

[Mawkie]

I suppose on the mainline there are some who don’t understand approach control, as I alluded to earlier, which is also worrying - so perhaps there’s a parallel there? Or are you referring to something different?

Well, when I have messroom discussions, I am astonished sometimes at some train operator's evident lack of knowledge, and whilst I recognise there can be gaps in knowledge due to a downgrading of training within LU, the information is on the company intranet for those that want a better understanding.

It has been discussed before that the train stop/trip cock system means that SPADs weren’t historically treated as seriously on the underground as on the mainline.

So..... I say this with love, but LU, says it wants to reduce SPADs, but the figures (see below) and the reduced ongoing training tell a different story.

As always, some enquiring soul has done an FOI and discovered there were 337 SPADs across LU in 2023. The large majority of these were obviously Piccadilly line drivers (as most other lines have full or part ATO), so I have to agree with your assertion (in fact I was told by one of the manager that the Pic had 180+ SPADs last year.) Would be interesting to see how many SPADs there were across the whole of national rail in the same period - I suspect low 200s?

 

[43066]

Timetables are generally built around line speeds and the various limits along the route. Thus, drivers will normally be expected to run at line speed in order to maintain those timetables. I can't think of any examples of services which require drivers to run below posted line speeds OR stock speed limits in order to maintain their timetabled progress. However, drivers have the freedom to run more slowly if their knowledge and experience tells them that doing so will not compromise the timetable.

Many MML intercity services, for example, are timed more generously than the stock and infrastructure would permit, simply because they’re pathed behind Thameslinks or 360 stopping services. The drivers aren’t required to run below line speed, but they will arrive early if they run at line speed, and don’t encounter any restrictive aspects.

Not to speak on behalf of Bald Rick, but speaking on behalf of Bald Rick, ATO

Of course, that should have been obvious. Thanks!

Biggest joke of all being there’s still a driver required for every train, and from a passenger comfort level it’s a lot worse; rather like being on the Victoria Line, but with the train 30 late because of a trespass incident near Brighton. I guess that’s progress for you .

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Out of interest - and this is an exceptionally interesting (and mildly infuriating) discussion - how does a driver know what their intermediate timings are, given that schedule cards usually only show booked timings at stops? So for instance how does a MML driver running non-stop from St Pancras to Leicester know what time they’re booked through Bedford, Wellingborough or Wigston Jn? Just wondering how you’re supposed to judge whether the ‘5 minutes of padding so I can coast for X-miles and keep time’ is actual padding across the run, or whether the timetable actually requires you to put the hammer down until the approaches to Leicester and then wait outside for 5 minutes for your booked platform?

Do drivers refer to RTT for example?

 

[philthetube]

Well, when I have messroom discussions, I am astonished sometimes at some train operator's evident lack of knowledge, and whilst I recognise there can be gaps in knowledge due to a downgrading of training within LU, the information is on the company intranet for those that want a better understanding.

So..... I say this with love, but LU, says it wants to reduce SPADs, but the figures (see below) and the reduced ongoing training tell a different story.

As always, some enquiring soul has done an FOI and discovered there were 337 SPADs across LU in 2023. The large majority of these were obviously Piccadilly line drivers (as most other lines have full or part ATO), so I have to agree with your assertion (in fact I was told by one of the manager that the Pic had 180+ SPADs last year.) Would be interesting to see how many SPADs there were across the whole of national rail in the same period - I suspect low 200s?

The spad policy on LUL is very different to that on national rail, drivers are taken off the train after a spad, and drug and alcohol tested, and spoken to by a manager, but then normally straight back on the train if it is the first inside 2 years, after a second there will be more investigation and possibly training undertaken, after a third the driver will be sent out with an instructor for a period to check on driving standards and if there are ongoing problems, have fourth inside 2 years and goodbye.

Although remaining on the drivers record they would drop off the clock after 2 years and another would be treated as a first if you had 2 years clear.

it is 3 years since I retired so things may have changed.

The rules are much more generous than for network rail drivers.

Underground drivers certainly have more spads then network rail drivers but I wonder what the numbers look like when the increased number of signals they pass is taken into account.

Until recently drivers were required to pull right up to signals when stopping in order to clear the block joint behind the train, this seems to have stopped happening although there are some stations where it is needed to stop a couple of feet from the signal in order to berth properly, Wembley park on the North comes to mind where there is a repeater in advance as the signal is not visible from the driving position.

To get back on topic, speaking personally, as a retired driver, firstly on the Northern and later on the Met I would drive to the timetable, there was no need to rush to do this and time could be made up, though it was rare to be able to do this as if your train was running late then most of the others probably were as well so there would be a train in front.

When following a train there was no point in chasing signals, in addition to this you know where you would see reds and drove accordingly to try and avoid stopping too often.

 

[baz962]

Out of interest - and this is an exceptionally interesting (and mildly infuriating) discussion - how does a driver know what their intermediate timings are, given that schedule cards usually only show booked timings at stops? So for instance how does a MML driver running non-stop from St Pancras to Leicester know what time they’re booked through Bedford, Wellingborough or Wigston Jn? Just wondering how you’re supposed to judge whether the ‘5 minutes of padding so I can coast for X-miles and keep time’ is actual padding across the run, or whether the timetable actually requires you to put the hammer down until the approaches to Leicester and then wait outside for 5 minutes for your booked platform?

Do drivers refer to RTT for example?

Our schedule cards show timings and Bedford is one them. Quite a few more. My first stop out of London today was Leicester and my diagram has 27 passing points.

 

[driver9000]

Out of interest - and this is an exceptionally interesting (and mildly infuriating) discussion - how does a driver know what their intermediate timings are, given that schedule cards usually only show booked timings at stops? So for instance how does a MML driver running non-stop from St Pancras to Leicester know what time they’re booked through Bedford, Wellingborough or Wigston Jn? Just wondering how you’re supposed to judge whether the ‘5 minutes of padding so I can coast for X-miles and keep time’ is actual padding across the run, or whether the timetable actually requires you to put the hammer down until the approaches to Leicester and then wait outside for 5 minutes for your booked platform?

Do drivers refer to RTT for example?

I don't work on the MML but my schedule card only shows booked stops and with experience you soon learn the traffic patterns and timings at intermediate points as you know how long it takes to get from A to B between stations. While there's no requirement to do so, we can refer to RTT, Working Timetable or Genius for timings but not while driving obviously.

 

[Efini92]

It varies a fair amount but the absolute maximums are:

110 PS - Permissible Speed, the ordinary base limit
115 MU - Multiple Unit, certain classes of MU may run at this speed
125 EPS - Enhanced Permissible Speed, these are the 'tilt' speeds which Class 390 Pendolinos (and tilt-enabled 221s) can travel at.

The maximum for MU differential is 125
Image shows 3 speed profiles at rugby Trent valley junction.
100 PS
125 MU
125 EPS

 

[hexagon789]

The maximum for MU differential is 125View attachment 166813
Image shows 3 speed profiles at rugby Trent valley junction.
100 PS
125 MU
125 EPS

Rugby isn't between Stoke and Macclesfield though, which was the original question.

 

[Surreytraveller]

evidently not from my train this morning. Our driver was consistently driving well under the limit, on green signals, and managed to lose a chunk of time and delay thousands of passengers (on our train and those behind) as a result.

Reported for investigation, obviously.

There was probably a reason for this. Some sort of defect which required a maximum speed. Something isolated, or a broken window or something.
Reporting a driver for doing their job correctly

 

[CC 72100]

An interesting discussion, that I'm pleased to see had remainded civil. A few comments from me:

You absolutely can drive defensively whilst still remaining on-time. It's probably what most drivers do day in day out.

I'd argue that if someone is losing time consistently with no reason to do so, that does warrant a bit of investigation (I use the term in the broadest sense, not an operational or formal investigation or anything like that). At what point does defensive become over-defensive and thus underconfident?

I personally don't wear a watch whilst driving. I have it on me as per kit requirements, but I take a view that delivery of the timetable is a product of safe driving; the latter produces the former, and the former isn't a goal in itself.

Generally speaking yes, you would be running at linespeed, but I'm more than happy for my speed to drop if I know I'm shortly coming into a speed reduction. If the linespeed is 65 and I'm coming up to a 50 in a mile time, I've no issue if my speed starts dropping to 63-62-61; I'll just adjust my braking accordingly to reflect my lower approach speed. I do like to coast wherever possible (many other drivers are far better at it than me!), but we'll still be bang on time.

As someone said to me recently, "nobody notices a train driven well, but everyone notices a train driver badly."

 

[Efini92]

Rugby isn't between Stoke and Macclesfield though, which was the original question.

You’re quite correct, I had missed that.

 

[scotraildriver]

On our long, single track routes such as the West Highland line, timings are such that it is absolutely essential you are at line speed at all times. Whilst the top speeds are low, the constant smallish changes have to be adhered to in order to not lose time and maintain the crossovers. If it's 45 you need to do 45. As soon as it changes to 60 you have to be on it. The route might seem slow and relaxing to passengers but it's the toughest route for drivers. You need to be constantly "on the limit".

 

[InkyScrolls]

On our long, single track routes such as the West Highland line, timings are such that it is absolutely essential you are at line speed at all times. Whilst the top speeds are low, the constant smallish changes have to be adhered to in order to not lose time and maintain the crossovers. If it's 45 you need to do 45. As soon as it changes to 60 you have to be on it. The route might seem slow and relaxing to passengers but it's the toughest route for drivers. You need to be constantly "on the limit".

That's very interesting; I've often wondered what the line is like to drive. It doesn't surprise me that's it's a mentally taxing line.

 

[AverageJoe]

There is a few comments on here that appear to be from non drivers that are telling actual drivers how they should be doing the job.

As regards to trains running slow than line speed on greens then it could absolutely be a good display of defensive driving if the conditions warrant it.

There could also be many other factors that a passenger may not be aware of.

I can’t think of any drivers I know who will drive slow on purpose.

But there are some sections of track that make complete sense. For me I drive a section that is a 60 on a down hill gradient. I get to 40 and shut off and my speed will slowly rise to 60. This particular section of track if u get up to 60 instantly then I will catch a stopper up and be hitting reds, but the way I do it I still arrive on time.


Every driver knows the route like the back of their hand so it won’t be about being scared to take power. Even if it’s a route that’s not been driven in a while you will approach it a bit more cautiously but you will still be hitting line speeds.

Some times it’s impossible to hit line speed, the railway can be daft and you can have something like a 75mph board followed by a 90mph then back down to 70 in a short distance, no train I know could manage that.

 

[Shrop]

I see nothing wrong with using rail speed limits as a target, so long as any other conflicting needs of the train are observed first. I thought that a lot of trains were timetabled on an expectation that the train would be running at linespeed where reasonably possible? If only car drivers would treat their infrastructure with the respect that train drivers do - for many car drivers another driver observing the speed limit in front of them often leads to impatience and frustration!

 

[craigybagel]

There's not much point driving a train at line speed if there's a load of recovery time built into the sectional running times and you can coast at a lower speed and still maintain punctuality. Any TOC that has DAS fitted to their trains will expect their drivers to follow the DAS advice and drive their train accordingly.

Nearly all our units have DAS fitted, but they've all been switched off. It was found it didn't give anywhere near the savings that were expected.

"Do they reward drivers for driving efficiently, for example? I’ve never heard of that happening."
I did get awarded a "coasting award mug " on the SE some years ago,( think it was when Connex were the TOC )

When we did have DAS, there was a bonus paid to drivers if they were following it's instructions often enough.

But there are some sections of track that make complete sense. For me I drive a section that is a 60 on a down hill gradient. I get to 40 and shut off and my speed will slowly rise to 60. This particular section of track if u get up to 60 instantly then I will catch a stopper up and be hitting reds, but the way I do it I still arrive on time.

There's definitely a lot of satisfaction to be found in keeping to time whilst not breaking any limits and making as few inputs to the controls as possible.

Some times it’s impossible to hit line speed, the railway can be daft and you can have something like a 75mph board followed by a 90mph then back down to 70 in a short distance, no train I know could manage that.

Slade Lane - Longsight on the down fast cracks me up. 90-75-90-65 in the space of about half a mile.....

 

[Starmill]

Out of interest - and this is an exceptionally interesting (and mildly infuriating) discussion - how does a driver know what their intermediate timings are, given that schedule cards usually only show booked timings at stops? So for instance how does a MML driver running non-stop from St Pancras to Leicester know what time they’re booked through Bedford, Wellingborough or Wigston Jn? Just wondering how you’re supposed to judge whether the ‘5 minutes of padding so I can coast for X-miles and keep time’ is actual padding across the run, or whether the timetable actually requires you to put the hammer down until the approaches to Leicester and then wait outside for 5 minutes for your booked platform?

Do drivers refer to RTT for example?

I'm pretty sure it's an option to have every mandatory timing location printed out. I guess which ones if any are shown is down to the configuration each operator has used on the software.

Real-time trains loads more timing locations on the day / night before. But of course no opportunity to refer to it once you set off. I'm not sure it would bring a benefit anyway.